HV 

W7T6 



THE TRUTH 



«IIN> 



THE CASE. 



J. ELLEN FOSTER, 



IOWA; 



<?*% 

%5^ 




Qass. 
Book 



/7K5; 






MhV, 



FOR GOD AND HOME, AND NATIVE LAND, 



THE TRUTH IN THE CASE, 



CONCERNING 



PARTISANSHIP AND NON-PARTISANSHIP 



IN THE 



o< W. C. T. LL lx> 



BY / 



\ 

J, ELLEN FOSTER, IOWA. 



AND OTHERS. 



THIS IS THE VICTORY, EVEN OUR FAITH. 

1589. 



/ 



PLEDGE OF THE N. W. C. T. U. 

" I hereby solemnly promise, God helping me, to abstain from all distilled, 
fermented, and malt Liquors, including Wine and Cider, and to employ all 
proper means to discourage the use of and traffic in the same." 



CONSTITUTION OF THE N. W. C. T. U. 
ARTICLE VI. 

FINANCE. 

Each State Organization shall pay annually to the National Treasury, an 
amount equal to ten cents per member of each auxiliary. 



BY-LAWS OF X. W. T. V . 
ARTICLE VIII. 
Sec. 2. No State Union shall he bound by any principle espoused or plan 
devised by the National W. C. T. V. except that all state auxiliaries must sub- 
scribe to the total abstinence pledge and to the Constitution of the National 
Union. 



an B. Anthony* 



Y\\[5 



f, 



l']?EPACE. 

Thk Truth in the ('ask is prepared at the request of many 
friends of temperance, within and without the Woman's Christian 
Temperance Union. 

They have believed it due. the great number of temperance 
friends who are in harmony with the position held by the Iowa 
W. C. T. U.j and many local unions and individual members 
throughout the country, that a clear statement of those positions 
be put in permanent form for general circulation, and frequent 
reference. 

It will 1)0 seen that while all the subjects treated are needed 
to make a finished whole, each one is complete in itself, and is 
suitable for general circulation as an individual leaflet. 

Tins plan of preparation was adopted at the suggestion of 
friends who desired to choose such parts as they considered most 
useful for their local work. 

The book and the leaflets can be secured by addressing Mrs. 
-J. Ellen Foster. Clinton. Iowa. 



CONXENXS. 



PAGE. 

Introduction J 1 

Reasons for issuing the Truth in 

the Case 12 

Temperance Creed 13 

x The Facts in the Case, reviewed 

Mrs. J. Ellen Foster, Iowa. 14 

Freedom of choice By-Law 14 

Debate denied on proposed Amend- 
ment 14 

Loyalty Test Resolution thrown out 15 

Similar Resolutions adopted 16 

Church illustration no parallel 16 

The partisan blight 16 

Non-partisan women notaH Repub- 
licans 17 

Mrs. Foster's supposed change of 

views 17 

Iowa Republicans 18 

Moral Reform and Legislative 

Action 19 

Party Action • 19 

Individual Action 19 

Society Action 19 

Partisan Action in N. W. C. T. U. . 20 
Memorials to Political Conventions 

in 1884 21 

Does the W. C. T. U. support Tem- 
perance Republicans 21 

The Third Party repudiates Local 

Option 21 

Plan of Work Committee 21 

Executive Committee of Detroit 

Convention 22 

Political parties are not Legislative 

Bodies 22 

Injustice dishonorable to christian 

controversy 22 

Personal letter of Mrs. Foster, 

Nov. 8th, 1883 23 

Mrs. Foster's opinion of inconsis- 
tent action in N. W. C. T. U . . 24 
Other facts in the Case, by Mrs. 

Mary J. Aldrich, Iowa ... 25 
Party action of National without 
previous discussion in Local or 

State Unions 25 

Sympathetic Declaration -. . . 25 

Individual Conviction or Repre- 
sentative Action, Which? 25 

.False Theories, Sophistries 25 

J Woman Suffrage 25 

Personnel of National Convention. 25 

Ex-officio Members 26 

Slavery Devotion 26 

Unreasonable Homage 26 

Miss Willard not a safe leader 26 

v ' Woman Suffrage 26 

Party Prohibition 26 

^ Ecclesiastical Emancipation of 

Women 26 

"Views expressed regretfully 28 

Crucifixion of Heart 28 



PACE 

Honest Difference of Opinion 28 

National Union sets key-note 28 

W. C. T. U. Publishing House 29 

Lecture Bureau 29 

International Council 29 

Miss Willard's Monthly Read- 
ing on the relation of the 
N. W. T. U. to Politics 
reviewed by Mrs. M. J. 

Aldrich, Iowa 30 

Position formerly held by the 

Union 30 

All__ facts necessary to full under- 

J standing 30 

Before 1881 no mention of party 

politics 31 

Non-partisan but not non-political 31 

Total Abstinence 31 

Prohibition 31 

Scientific Temperance Instruction. . 31 

cAVoman Suffrage 31 

Washington Convention, 188 1 32 

Louisville, 1882 32 

Freedom of States 33 

Party Prohibition vs. Non-partisan 

Prohibition 33 

Political Motives Pure 33 

Promises False 33 

Mrs. Rounds Loyalty-test Resolu- 
tion 33 

Detroit Convention, 1883 33 

Executive Committee at Detroit. ... 34 
Memorials to Political Conventions, 

1884 34 

St. Louis Convention, 1884 34 

Philadelphia, 1885 35 

Minneapolis, 1886 35 

' Gag-law 35 

Gag-law Approved 35 

Nashville, 1887 35 

Non-partisan Amendment tabled 

without Discussion 35 

New York, 1888 35 

"Tolerant" Methods 35 

Right of Petition Denied 35 

Iowa Memorial 36 

All Discussion Suppressed 36 

Answer to Iowa Memorial 36 

National Officers advise against 

Discussion in Local Unions. ... 36 

Reading of President Willard 36 

Curious Tapestry 36 

Fact and Fallacy 36 

Republican Attacks 36 

Iowa Memorial 36 

Church Illustration 37 

Misstatement of Minority Position 

regarding dues 37 

Union Signal and W. T. P. A 37 

N. W. C. T. U., and Republican 

Party 38 



CONTEXTS. 



Greenback Party 38 

N. W. C. T. U. and Prohibition 

Party 38 

Kennett Square Union Resolutions 38 
Work Prejudiced by Partisan posi- 
tion of National 38 

Assumed Right of the Majority. ... 39 
" Loyalty Test " at New York Con- 
vention 39 

The Iowa UnioYi, Non-partisan. ... 39 

Department Work Suffers 39 

The "National" no Constitutional 

Right to interfere with Iowa. . . 40 
Irreconcilable Methods of Union 

Prohibition Work 40 

Convince the People of the Truth. . 40 

Progress 40 

Conflict of Opinion 40 

God can Overrule 40 

Review of MissWillard's Month- 
ly Reading on the Relation 
of the N. W. T. U. to Pol- 
itics, Mrs. J. Ellen Foster, 

Iowa 41 

Criticisms of General Public 41 

Is the N. W. C. T. U. Infallible?.. . 41 
Christian Ministers and the Re- 
ligious Press 41 

Woman's National Republican Club 41 

Impugn Women's Motives 42 

Third Party Women Protest 42 

Strictly Political 42 

General Officers stop Discussion. . . 42 

Bugle Blast 43 

Intolerance Confesses 43 

"Bear Witness of the Evil " 43 

Success of Non-partisan Measures.. 43 

President of Maine Union 43 

Confession of Republican Faith.. . . 43 

Christian Work 43 

The W. C. T. U 43 

Usefulness impaired by Partisan 

Work 44 

The Late Hon. J. B. Finch 44 

National Temperance Society 44 

•'Cry aloud and spare not '' 44 

" Hardly a Local Union " where 

the question " has come up " . . 45 

Union " practically solid " 45 

Has no National Officer ever ad- 
vised Party Action ? 45 

Self Respecting W. C. T. U. women 

reply 45 

Methodist General Conference 46 

Chairman Dickie 46 

"Obstructionists" 46 

" Refractory Child " 46 

Money appropriated 46 

Church illustration 46 

Bishops of the Methodist Church. . 46 

Money diverted 46 

Did the National Union commit a 

crime ? 47 



PAGE 

The principle of party alliance 

wrong 47 

W. C. T. U. in Maine and Kansas 

oppose Republican Party 47 

Mrs. Hoffman in Iowa, and against 

Republican Party everywhere. 48 
Iowa in the "dry-dock of Repub- 
licanism " 48 

Iowa Temperance men 4S 

Interference of men 49 

Prohibition Party leaders and W. C. 

T. U 49 

Loyalty test resolution 49 

Resolutions in support of editorial 
management of Union Signal 

on political question 50 

Miss Willard technically correct. ... 50 

Illinois Memorial 50 

Miss Willard calls the Iowa W. C. 

T. U. a Republican Society. . . 51 
The limit of Constitutional power . 51 
Previous question. called while Mrs. 
Foster had the floor at the New- 
York Convention 51 

No peace until their warfare is ac- 
complished 52 

The Genesis of Party Work in 
the W. C. T. U., Mrs. M. 

J. Aldrich, Iowa .">:! 

The Facts in the Case 53 

Pettyfogging 53 

Truth untold 53 

Louisville Convention 53 

Conversion of the President 53 

Executive Committee Meeting at 

Detroit. . . ., 53 

Mammoth Petition 53 

Lake Bluff Convocation 53 

Women in Politics 53 

Annual Address at Washington, 

1881 54 

The rights of others 54 

Glimpses of Fifty Years 54 

Cheering for Garfield 55 

Analysis incorrect 55 

Individual action 5-5 

Official representation 56 

The real Genesis 55 

Evil results more than realized. . . 

Home Protection Standard 

"The Convention reluctant to mak< 

the new departure " 

The foundation but not the " Gen 

esis" 

Louisville resolution was the Ew> 

dus 

Ideas obscured by words of the 

Resolution 57 

End of the wilderness journey 57 

The Non-Partisan Minority in 
X. W. C. T. U., Mis. J. 

Ellen Foster, Iowa 58 

First official Act of Protest 53 



CONTENTS. 



Superintendent of the Department 
of Legislation 

Mrs. Foster's resignation 

Elected to Iowa Presidency 

Philadelphia Protest 

Minneapolis Protest 

Nashville Protest 

New York Convention 

Memorial from Iowa 

Right of Petition denied 

Previous Question called 

Auxiliary State Union denied hear- 
ing 

Letter to Mrs. Foster from Miss 
Willard 

Reply of Mrs Foster 

W. C. T. U. Memorials and 
Answers. Mrs. J. Ellen 
Foster, Iowa 

Iowa continually protests 

Iowa organized before the National 
Society 

Utter failure of partisan measures. 

Memorial of 1888 

Illinois Memorial 

Answers of Sub-committee of Ex- 
ecutive Committee. 

What it costs to stand for conviction 
in the N. W. C. T. U 

Memorial from Iowa 

Answer to Memorial from Iowa. . . . 

Memorial from Illinois 

Answer to Memorial from Illinois. . 

Reply of the National Convention 
to certain Iowa women 

Irregularities 

Illinois Memorial never regularly 
presented to the Convention . . . 

The Irregular Memorials from 
Iowa Women. Mrs. F. J. 
Ovington, Rec. Sec. W. C. 
T. U., Iowa 

Charges of Memorials 

The Reason Why 

Iowa By-law 

Implore special help 

Presidents in Non-Partisan Society. 

National Executive Committee re- 
ceived Memorials irregularly 
sent 

Opportunity for discussion refused 

Statement by Mrs. Foster 

Iowa denied rights in the Conven- 
tion 

"Suppression" of The Reason Why 

Business Manager of the W. T. P. A. 

Iowa '-leaders" encourage full dis- 
cussion 

Iowa W. C. T. U. Messenger 

Iowa By-law 

IOM-a plan of representation in Na- 
tional Convention 



58 
58 
58 

58 
60 

60 

GO 
60 

60 
(11 

01 

01 

02 



(33 

G3 

63 
63 
63 
63 

63 

63 

63 
65 
66 
67 

67 

68 

69 



PAGE. 

Iowa delegates to National Conven- 
tion must be true to Iowa .... 74 
Misunderstanding of natural ten- 
dency of party work in the W. 

C. T. U 75 

Annual meeting of Fourth District 

in Iowa 75 

Vote of Censure 75 

First District Convention 75 

Eighth District Convention 75 

Districts repudiate unauthorized 

acts of their presidents 75 

Political Robbery. Editor Iowa 
W. C. T. U. Messenger, 
Mrs. Florence Miller, Iowa 76 
Constitution of the United States. . 76 
Moral influence of woman the polit- 
ical power which stands to her 

in place of the ballot 76 

Aggregrate influence cannot exist 

without individual factors 76 

The unit of political power 76 

Foundation principles of political 

liberty 76 

Fundamental human rights 76 

; Right of protest denied 77 

1 One tyranny begets another 77 

Differences ground of regret 77 

Duty demands that we stand against 

wrong 77 

Iowa not alone. Open letter 
from Mrs . Frances E. Swift, 
President of W. C. T. U., 

Pennsylvania Tl 

Iowa not Alone. Letter in the 
White Ribbon from Mrs. 
Jos. D. Weeks, Rec. Sec. 

W. C. T. U 78 

Iowa not Alone. From a Coun- 
ty President. Mrs. Richard 
Darlington, President Chest- 
er County W. C. T..U.... 81 
Iowa not Alone. Chester Coun- 
ty. . 84 

From the White Ribbon, Penna. 

Jan. 1889 86 

Iowa not Alone. The Condi- 
tion that Confronts the 
Women's Christian Temper- 
ance Union. Helen Gilbert 
Ecob, Albany, N. Y. (Re- 
printed from the Union 
Signal, January 10th, 1889. 
The clauses in brackets have 
been added since the first 
publication.) 88 



CONTENTS. 



Protection to the Minority 88 

Christian Unity 88 

Organized Unity 88 

A consciousness of majorities and 

minorities 88 

The mistake of 1882 has become 

the wrong of 1888 88 

Minority believe party alliance hin- 
ders prohibition 89 

"Fools rush in where angels fear 

to tread 89 

A corporate body should ally itself 

to no party 89 

' ' To the Jew I became a Jew' ' 89 

The non-partisan exalts nothing but 

prohibition 90 

Prohibition is the "unknown God" 

whom many ignorantly worship 90 

Children of Israel 90 

Evolution upward and Evolution 

downward 90 

Home Rule for Ireland 90 

Prohibition fails through lack of 

Conviction 90 

Prohibition not incarnate in the 

Third Party 91 

Balance of power wasted 91 

Disastrous in results 91 

Effect on churches 91 

Results in legislation 91 

Temperance men " knifed ; ' at the 

polls by Prohibitionists 91 

Impossible for members of W. C. 91 

T. U. to be politically free 91 

Dues support party action 91 

Majorities have only the right to 

do right 92 

The action of the National Conven- 
tion is oppressive or meaning- 
less 92 

Is partisan action representative? . . 92 
Representative action is binding.. 93 
Mistakes, blunders, inconsistencies 93 

Official and authoritative 94 

Adoption of the Non-Partisan 
Amendment offered by Mrs. 
Campbell 94 

Iowa not alone. What is the mis- 
sion of the W. C.T.U.? Mrs. 

L. H. Wilson, Illinois 95 

The infancy of the organization. . . 95 

Partisan departure in 1884 95 

Illinois loyalty-test resolution 95 

Personal objection 95 

Destroys political liberty 95 

The Third Party a superfluity 96 

Reasons for not favoring a Third 

Party 96 

Convictions of Illinois women may 
be whispered in the ear but not 
proclaimed on the house top. . 96 



Devious and misleading 96 

Mrs. Rounds says we are not a polit- 
ical party : : - • • 96 

Mrs. Lathrop says we are a political 

organization 96 

Engenders dissentions and bitter- 
ness °^ 

Third Party phraseology 97 

Utter hopelessness of Third Party 

action °8 

Scientific Temperance Instruction 

a non-partisan measure 99 

Mrs. Tilton, Washington, D. C 99 

Republican Party Record 99 

Democratic Record 100 

Non-Partisan Amendment 100 

What will the Convention of 1889 

do ? 101 

Iowa not Alone. From "White 

Ribbon," Conn 102 

Iowa not Alone. In His Name. 
—Mrs. O. E. Blair, Little 

Rock, Ark 104 

Iowa not Alone. In Union 
There is Strength — An ap- 
peal to the members of 
the W. C. T. U., Mrs. M. 
K. Blake, Oakland, Cal . . 106 
Iowa not Alone. Letter from 
Mrs. Angie F. Newman, 

Neb 107 

Iowa not Alone. Letter from 

Mrs. Porter, Maine 110 

Many unions non-partisan 110 

Aroostook County makes vigorous 

protest 110 

Aroostook County "Y's" 110 

Official inquiry of State Secretary. 110 
The right of non-partisans to use 
the name W. C. T. U. chal- 
lenged 110 

The controversy should not reflect 
on the Christian spirit of the 

participants 110 

Majorities and Minorities 110 

Wise reforms and needed charities 111 
"I wish the W. C. T. U. had never 

touched politics." Ill 

"Gospel of sweet reasonableness" . Ill 
Iowa not Alone. Massachusetts 112 
Six partisan-unions in the States. . . 112 
Many unions protest and pass non- 
partisan resolutions 112 

South Framingham Union 112 

Brookline Union 112 

Natick Union 112 

Irregular and Illegal Proceed- 
ings. Mrs. Florence Miller, 



Iowa 



113 



CONTENTS. 



9 



PAGE, 

Records of Executive Committee of 

New York Convention 113 

Memorials from District Presidents 

in Iowa 113 

How came individual Memorials 

before National Convention?. . 113 
How are Memorials and Petitions 

presented to legislative bodies? 113 

The Illinois Memorial 113 

Memorials referred without reading 113 
Convention could not refer what it 

did not possess 114 

Replies of Executive Committee to 

Memorials 114 

Memorials from Illinois and Iowa 
women retained till ten o'clock 

last evening 115 

Discussion summarily prevented.. 115 

Assumption of power 115 

The Executive Committee the ser- 
vant of the Convention 115 

Duty to stand against wrong 115 

The Distresses of Party Alliance 

Mrs. J. Ellen Foster 116 

Distresses painfully manifest 116 

Probity and Christian courtesy. ... 116 

Annual leaflet 116 

No reference to political position. . 116 
The public is asked to contribute. . 116 

Is it honest 117 

Temperance Republicans 117 

Minister and Church . 117 

Suppression of the Truth 117 

Carelessness in official statement.. 117 

The Rounds Amendment 118 

Mutilation of public records 118 

Will Mrs. Rounds submit 118 

The Iowa Memorial 119 

Right of Petition denied 119 

Exclusion from official records. . . . 119 
Parliamentary courtesy denied Mrs. 

Foster 1 20 

Payment of dues 121 

Misappropriation of Funds 121 

Liberty of choice resolution 121 

Coercion of National Society 121 

Mrs. Rounds "punishes" an Illinois 

Woman 121 

Free Speech 122 

Mrs. Rounds evidences grim hero- 
ism 122 

"What answer?" 122 

Resolutions of Illinois Union 123 

Daniel prays toward Jerusalem. . . . 123 

Conflicting claims 123 

Mrs. Rounds a brave woman 121 

Wholly united on few lines 124 

Woman Suffrage in the South 121 

Alabama W. C. T. U 124 

Shades of Bunker Hill and Mount 

Vernon, protect us 125 

North and South brought into closer 

Union 125 



PAGE. 

Democratic Party 126 

Republican Party 126 

The truth makes free 126 

Speak Out. Letter from Mrs. 
Lydia II. Tilton, Cor. Sec'y 
W. C. T. U. District of 

Columbia 127 

New England women criticise 127 

The facts in the Case 127 

Intelligent women have party pre- 
ferences 127 

Must not repel those we wish to 

gain 127 

Wife of Temperance Republican. . 127 

Non-Partisan and Partisan 127 

Mrs. Foster urges all to stand for 

the party they believe right. . . 127 
The Third Party hinders Prohibi- 
tion 127 

Mt. Washington 128 

Unite upon a few ways 128 

Many fallen out 129 

Mrs. Foster took seven minutes of 

New York Convention time. . .. 129 

Not once on the platform 129 

"Union " a misnomer 129 

Weakness and present trouble 129 

Inaugural Ball 129 

The offer ce against Iowa. Mrs. 

J. Ellen Foster, Iowa. . . . 130 
Official letter concerning National 

dues 130 

Constitutional Limitations. . . 131 

Letter to Iowa Unions from Gen- 
eral Officers 132 

Ecclesiastical Assumption. Mrs. 

Florence Miller, Iowa 133 

Plan of Work of New York Con- 
vention 133 

W. C. T. U. Deaconesses 133 

Christian Work of Women 134 

Relation of Church work 131 

Woman's Position in the Church. . . 134 

Church Union 134 

Ought the W. C. T. U. to usurp 

Churchly Orders ? 134 

Rightful deference for Church au- 

thoritiy 134 

Emancipation within the church . . . 134 

Assumption of sacred orders 134 

Partisan Pledges in W. C. T. U. / 
Conventions. M. J. Aid- 
rich, Iowa 135 

A time to keep silence and a time 

time to speak 135 

Representation in Conventions. . . . 185 
Christian Temperance Women out- 
side the W. C. T. U 135 

Remedy rests with them 135 

Woman Suffrage 1 35 

Party Prohibition 135 



10 



CONTENTS. 



Temperance men would not, tem- 
perance women ought not to 

submit 136 

Subject rarely discussed in local 

unions 136 

Actual work is non partisan 136 

Delegates should represent socie- 
ties which send them 136 

Enthusiastic W. C. T. U. Woman. . 136 
Party politics not legitimate W. C. 

T. U. work : . 137 

Should a church endorse a party. . . 137 

Iowa opposed 137 

Representative Action. Mrs. 

Florence Miller, Iowa ... 139 
Representative but not represented 139 
Ex-officio Members and Delegates.. 139 

Free legislative body 139 

Freedom of States and individuals. 139 

Suffrage question 140 

Constitutional Construction 140 

Game of fast and loose 140 

Dynamite of truth 140 

Proposed Amendment 141 

Non-partisan Amendment. Mrs. 

Campbell, Penna 141 

Loyalty Test Amendment, as Intro- 
duced 141 

Loyalty Test Amendment, as given 

in the Minutes 141 

Is it True. Mrs. M. J. Aldrich, 

Iowa 14'2 

Majority must not trample on rights 

of minority 142 

Representative action rests on dis- 
puted authority 142 

Woman's Political Influence 142 

National Convention a delegate body 142 
This Representative body did com- 
mit the Union "in its entirety" 143 

Such action unwaranted 143 

Such action inconsistent 1 43 

Partisan action of 1884 should be 

rescinded 143 

Mrs. Campbell's Amendment 143 

For His sake, and in His name. 144 
Are "Non-partisans"' Partisans? 

Mrs. J. Ellen Foster, Iowa. 145 
Mrs. Foster an active Republican . . 145 
Miss Willard as active for Third 

Party 145 

Mrs. Foster works as an individual. 145 
Miss Willard uses her official rela- 
tion to serve party ends 145 

Is a "consulting member " of Na- 
tional Prohibition Paity Com- 
mittee 145 

Iowa W. C. T. U, never allied with 

the Republican Party 145 

Political Convictions 146 

"Embezzlement" 146 

Ought not majorities to rule ? 146 



Party Fealty Test 146 

Unite the Forces. Mrs. Flor- 
ence Miller, Iowa 147 

The Iowa W. C. T. V. Messenger. . 147 
Friends of Non-partisan Temper- 
ance Work 147 

Subscription price, $1.00 per year. 147 
Woman's Iowa Publishing Com- 
pany 147 

Principles — Policies — Political 
Parties — Reform Associa- 
tions. Mrs. J. Ellen Foster, 

Iowa 148 

The use of parties 148 

The Garden of the Lord 148 

The Hoofs of Partisanship 148 

The question on its merits 14 K 

" I have not troubled Israel " 148 

We are prohibitionists, every one. 148 
Appropriating influence "under 

false pretences " 148 

It is right to suppose all women 

honest 149 

Distinction between Political Ques- 
tions and Party Questions 149 

Personal. Mrs. J. Ellen Foster, 

Iowa 150 

Chivalrous devotion 150 

The Crusade 150 

Early Years 150 

Love is a noble sentiment 3 50 

Question of duty 150 

Yielded my judgment to her's 150 

Wrong theories lead to wrong action 150 
Wrong to secure nominal accept- 
ance in advance of real convic- 
tion 150 

Silence brings loss of confidence 

and confusion in ideas 151 

Fictitious positions 151 

Hearts of many women witness. . . 151 

" Crime of the century " 151 

Miss Willard's personality ever sa- 
credly guarded by me 151 

Her career in public service 151 

A Joan d'Arc in America 152 

The sober judgment of the aver- 
age citizen 152 

Miss Willard offers her theories of 

reform 152 

Little hope that Prohibition Party 

leaders will change 152 

Men and Women in the ranks are 

many 152 

I will argue, expostulate and plead. 152 
Called a "disturber of the peace " . 153 

How are we brought low 153 

The cause of the Home against the 

Saloon 153 

The character of christian woman- 
hood 153 

The kingdom of Christ in this dear 

land of ours - 153 



INTRODUCTION 



MRS J. ELLEN FOSTER, IOWA, 



Alchohol is poison and has no place in the human system. Upon 
this scientific truth and its correlates in philanthropy, patriotism and 
religion the temperance reform rests. 

Its originators and present champions are earnest men and 
women whose labors have been of untold blessing to the race. 

The results achieved attest the dignity and magnitude of the 
work. But l 'We have this treasure in earthen vessels, "and this 
reform is subject to the imperfections and limitations of all human 
effort. 

The Woman's Christian Temperance Union has been an agency 
honored of God and accepted by the people. " Many souls in glory 
now," and many more u still on the way," bless God for its sweet 
ministrations. 

Organized in 18T4 and extending into every State and Territory in 
the Union, it has been effective in teaching the two great doctrines of 
total abstinence for the individual and prohibition for the State. 

The Church, out of which it came, has been its great support and 
wise counsellor, and has been in return energized into greater spirit- 
ual life and increased activity. ^— — """■ 

Five years ago — October, 1888-^ this great organization, by reso- 
lution in its annual convention at St. Louis, allied itself with a politi- 
cal party: at four succeeding conventions it has restated its faith and 
pledged its co-operation. The officers of the National Society are 
influential leaders in this so-called prohibition party; the services of 
these leaders have been given freely to the support of this party and 
its candidates : the literature of this party has been officially endorsed 
and circulated by the Woman's Society. The National and many 
State auxiliaries have co-operated to the full extent of their ability in 
the operations of this party. 

The President of the National Society said, several years ago ? 
that she believed the chiefest need of the temperance reform to-day 
was, a political party pledged to its support. She has declared 
u party politics " to be " the chiefest agency in our work." 

This party alliance with its necessary and ever attendant evils 
has greatly injured the work of the N. W. C. T. U. : because I believe 
this, I cry aloud and spare not, if so be I may show our people their 



12 

transgression and our W. C. T. U. house its sin ; therefore, I ask all 
into whose hands this book shall come to read carefully and con- 
sider prayerfully the testimony given and explanations made herein. 

I should scarcely ask the general public to listen to so extended 
a presentation of personal beliefs and personal official actions, had 
not the whole controversy been made so largely personal by those 
who insist that we who dissent from the party policy of the National 
Union are influenced by personal animosity to Miss Willard or by 
unworthy or mercenary motives. 

This smallness of comprehension and pettiness of spirit, may find 
partial explanation in the fact that women have but lately begun to 
study questions of duty apart from personal considerations. 

If this shall be deemed sufficient explanation it is none the less 
pitiful. The official organ of the National Society and its many pub- 
lications, as also those of the Woman's Temperance Publication Asso- 
ciation do not hesitate to assail the Christian integrity of the 
protesting women. The General Officers of the National Society have 
sent out a pamphlet entitled the " Facts in the Case," which has been 
scattered by the thousand throughout the land. This pamphlet con- 
tains some statements which are incorrect and others so put as to 
make them the most dangerous of errors. Beside this, as if to more 
pointedly sharpen the attack, Miss Willard herself prepared the 
" Monthly Reading'' for February, which is circulated among the 
Local Unions. 

In this Monthly Reading she attacks Mrs. J. Ellen Foster by name, 
and reviews certain acts which she asserts Mrs. Foster has performed 
as Chairman of the Woman's National Republican Club. 

It would take a large book to print a fraction of the false, unjust, 
and therefore cruel things written, and printed and said of the women 
who dare give expression to dissent from the positions taken by the 
N. W. C. T. U. in its new departures, or who further exercise the 
ordinary right of free speech, so precious in this age and country. 

In these crucial times when private character, and public teach- 
ing and legislative theory are all under the lens of popular scrutiny, it 
is proper that every public teacher should avoid ambiguity. It is 
impossible to escape the censure of those within or without, who 
rejoice in iniquity and do not " rejoice in the truth" (unless it con- 
forms to their theories) neither is it possible to so adjust words and 
phrases that they are impossible of misconstruction ; but the consci- 
entious public teacher ought to try to satisfy the honest inquirer after 
the truth. 

The following temperance creed is therefore inserted. It was 
given in a letter to a friend some time ago, and is confirmed by events 
since transpired: 



13 • 

[From the Putnam {Conn.) Patriot, Sept. 17, 18 S '6. ] 

Mrs. J. Ellen Foster sends the following letter in answer to the 
inquiry, "If she ever endorsed the third party movement ? " 

Bridgeport, Conn., Sept. 11, 1886. 
Dear Mrs. Whitmore : — I thank you for your letter just received. 

Fealty to a common cause demands such frankness among its advocates. I 
often meet reported sayings and doings of mine which are untrue as to fact, and 
unjust as to inference. I am helpless to contradict those of which I am ignorant. 
You were very kind to write me as you did. You ask me if I ever endorsed the 
third party, I answer, never in the sense of its present doctrines, measures and methods. 
To do so would be, for me, a travesty of moral principle, of political ethics and of 
Christian courtesy. 

I believe in constitutional prohibition with enforcing and enforced statutes in 
State and Nation. I believe Local Option to be a temporary expedient, useful 
and sometimes very effective. 

I believe License — low or high — to be a delusion and a snare. I do not 
believe it reduces the amount of intoxicating liquors sold, or lessens the evils of 
intemperance. 

I believe in " political prohibition " as it has been illustrated in Local Option 
in the South, in "No License elections " everywhere, and in the popular elections, 
in Kansas, Iowa, Maine and Rhode Island, by which prohibition has been put 
into the organic law of those States. 

I believe in the election of good and true men to carry out the people's will in 
the three departments of the Government : Legislative, Judiciary and Executive. 

In general politics I am a Republican, am such by heredity and environment 
and present conviction. But in the future, as in the past, I would be glad to 
assist in the defeat of a liquor Republican at any time anywhere, if in so doing his 
place could be Jilted by a temperance man of any other party . 

I believe in standing by prohibition and in standing by men, who in their per- 
sonal and official relations represent the highest attainable standard possible in a pop- 
ular government where majorities rule. 

I do not believe in putting up men merely to go through the motions of 
voting for them and to keep up the party organization, when the result of such 
/ party organization and third party voting is to put liquor men or their sympathiz- 
\ers in offices of public trust. 

The " third party" vote does not represent five per cent, of the prohibitory 
sentiment of the country. It is smallest in those States where such sentiment, 
represented in law, is dominant. 

All our successes in the past have been accomplished through non-partisan 

methods. This is particularly true of the South and of the recent legislation in 

the interest of temperance instruction in schools. The "third party" policy 

would have defeated this legislation. I want this legislation, and I am against what- 

' ever seems to me to hinder it. 

I do not deny the right of any person to vote or sympathize with any party 
he chooses, but when he assumes that his party is a method of temperance work, then 
it, the party, must stand the criticism as to the wisdom or unwisdom of the 
method. The logic of passing events confirms my opinions, strengthens my con- 
victions that the " third party" method is wrong in the principles which its advo- 
cates use in its behalf, and disastrous to prohibition and the general interests of 
the temperance reform. Yours sincerely, 

J. Ellen Foster. 



14 
THE FACTS IN THE CASE— REVIEWED. 

J. ELLEN FOSTER, IOWA. 

This is a forty-four page leaflet prepared by the General Officers 
of the National Woman's Christian Temperance Union and published 
by the Woman's Temperance Publication Association, Chicago ; it 
claims to set forth the political policy of the National Society, and to 
correct mis-statements concerning it. 

First. It is claimed that the by-law below given contains the pol- 
icy which has always governed the N. W. C. T. IT. 

' ' No State Union shall be bound by any principle espoused by 
the N. W. C. T. U., except that all States auxiliary must subscribe to 
the total abstinence pledge and to the Constitution of the N. W. C. 
T. U." 

This by-law is correctly given, but it is not true that it has gov- 
erned the policy of the national Union. In so far as it has had the 
power the National Union has visited its displeasure upon those who 
have declared they would not be bound by the partisan policy of the 
National Society. 

Iowa, which has been pronounced in opposition to this policy has 
been called a ' l refractory child, " and Iowa women who have made 
open protest against this policy have been declared "obstructionists.'' 
This is the truth in the case. 

On the fourth page reference is made to a by-law, adopted in 1888, 
forbidding discussion on the party question in the National Conven- 
tion. This by-law was without parallel in the history of popular 
legislative bodies. It declares, "Any resolution referring to our* 
attitude toward political parties shall be decided by vote without dis- 
cussion." It was adopted by a large majority without a word of pro- 
test from the National President. It has even been approved by her; 
as one of the General Officers she said in reference to its repeal ; "It 
had done its work." What the "work" was, the debate at the next 
succeeding Nashville Convention shows. 

At that time an Amendment to the Constitution was presented by 
Mrs. Aldrich of Iowa ; the privilege of debate was denied, a motion 
to lay it on the table — not debatable — being immediately made and 
carried. This was even more summary than the by-law would justify; 
that referred to resolutions, this was a proposed amendment; it could 
hardly be supposed that the partisan majority would make this record 
of unwillingness to discuss a proposed Amendment to the Constitu- 
tion, but this they did, and further showed their determination to 
suppress the consideration of the question by refusing Mrs. Aldrich's 
request to make an "explanatory statement." 



15 . 

Will any number of protestations of fair treatment of the 
minority cover up testimony of these "facts" which made their 
burning record in the hearts of the protesting minority and in the 
memory of the lookers on. 

On page 40 of the Minutes (1887) this record is found : 
"The order of business, the consideration of proposed amendments 
to the National Constitution, was taken up, Mrs. Leech withdrew the 
one offered by herself. 

The second, offered by Miss Pugh, was laid upon the table after 
long discussion. The third, offered by Mrs. Foster, was tabled." 

Notice, Miss Pugh's amendment received, long discussion ; notice 
further, Mrs. Foster did not offer the Amendment, she ivas not present 
at the Convention, not having returned from Europe. She had given 
notice of the Amendment a year previous, but Mrs. Aldrich intro- 
duced it, and it was to her that the parliamentary injustice was done. 
It is also stated as proof that the partisan majority had no desire to 
coerce any individual member or State, that a resolution embodying 
the sentiment of the TV. C. T. U. of Illinois, declaring that no member 
should speak from the public platform to antagonize the partisan pol- 
icy of the National Union, and that any person so speaking was dis- 
loyal ; this resolution was u thrown out and not considered." The 
facts are, that such a resolution was brought from the Committee on 
Resolutions, but was suppressed in reading until called for by a lady 
from New York State ; whereupon another lady objected to the con- 
sideration of the resolution. Such a Parliamentary procedure was 
very questionable. An inquiry as to the motive for withholding this 
resolution from discussion in the Convention is naturally suggested. 
Did the National President fear that the resolution would carry if she 
allowed discussion upon it ? Did she fear the partisan majority would 
be consistent with itself and adopt the resolution ? The delegates 
from Illinois were wholly consistent, for if it was right for the National 
Society to pledge the influence of the Society to any political party, it 
is not right for any individual member to destroy the "influence " by- 
opposing the party. Did the leaders of the party alliance in the 
National Union shrink from the public censure which they knew would 
follow the adoption of such a resolution ; did they fear to eat the fruit 
of the tree which they themselves had planted ? 

Second. In answer to the objection made by Mrs. Aldrich that 
the majority had no more right to pledge the Society to the Prohibi- 
tion party than it would have to pledge the Society to some denomina- 
tion, Miss Willard's words are quoted to the effect that the churches 
were all favorable to the temperance question, whereas all parties 
were not; but this reasoning is most vulnerable. The question is, "Has 
the majority any right to determine what is the relation of a church 



16 

to the temperance reform, and to pledge the influence of the Society 
11 in its entirety " to the church or churches which pass the test of 
judgment ? 

Is it just to adjudge the relation of any party to the temperance 
reform and to convey the allegiance of the Society to the party 
approved ? 

No reference, direct or indirect, was made in the Constitution to 
the party question ; this was not stated ' ' in the bond " and is an 
usurpation of power on the part of the majority wholly unjustifiable. 

Third. On pages 6 and 1 of the "Facts in the Case " it is sought 
to sustain the partisan alliance of the National Union by citing reso- 
lutions adopted by certain conferences of the Methodist church ; if the 
facts, as stated, were correct, the justification would not be estab- 
lished ; but this difference exists in the facts. Religious bodies have 
sometimes given utterance in favor of parties ; occasional Methodist 
conferences have declared for the Prohibition party, but they never 
have presumed to pledge the influence of the church which they rep- 
resent to that party. 

The bishops are all Prohibitionists ; only three or four voted the 
Prohibition party ticket, but no one of them approves pledging the 
influence of the Church to that or any other party. 

Fourth. In this it is attempted to show that the fears of friends 
that the National Society would suffer through its party alliance, 
have been wholly groundless and unsustained by fact ; and a glowing 
showing is made of the present position and outlook of the National 
Union. 

The saddest result of the partisan blight is a lack of sensitiveness 
to the decrease of moral power consequent upon this unnatural 
alliance. 

There seems to have been a deliberate choice of the coarser and 
more carnal weapons of warfare rather than the silent but absolutely 
resistless power of moral conviction as an incentive to pure political 
action. The voice of partisanship is, ' ' We'll show our power by 
ruining those who will not listen to our appeals;" it discards the evo- 
lution of political truth and seeks to bring about revolution in party 
politics. 

Its words are softer than music and smoother than oil when it 
idealizes itself and its own purposes and plans. It advises " sweet 
reasonableness " and " serene" confidence, but if a woman dares 
express a contrary political opinion, and cries aloud so that others 
hear, she is called a "Judas " a " sender of spurious documents " and 
doing il hellish work." 

Is it any wonder that women who can conduct a controversy 
with these weapons, who can allow such words to pass their lips, are 



17 

incapable of seeing that our Christian work has been hurt by this 
party alliance. 

Miss Willard does not herself use such inelegant phrases, but she 
has no official censure for those who do ; she calls those who exhaust 
the dictionary for expletives of abuse of ministers and honored laymen 
who dare vote any other than the Prohibition ticket as u our powerful 
friend and ally." 

Fifth. Attempt is made by statement and insinuation to convey 
the impression that all non-partisan women are Republicans ; ridicule 
is visited upon a claim of non-partisanship from purely disinterested 
motives. 

On the 9th page it is said, "A general reply to the reiterated 
charges embodied in the protests of non-partisan Republican members 
was made at the Philadelphia Convention in 1885 ; " the truth is that 
all the women who protested at Philadelphia were not Republican, 
but if they had been Republicans, what had that to do with their non- 
partisanship ? 

With all the solemnity which words could convey they declare 
that they desire prohibition in State and nation. Again and again 
they declare that they do not make their opposition to partisanship 
because they desire to help a party ; they say again and again, ' l We 
do this for the cause of temperance and in the interest of the W. C 
T. U." 

It would be well for these ladies who thus impute dishonest 
motives to remember the words of the National President in her New 
York address: ('We must remember that wherein we impute bad 
unotives in another we confess them in ourselves." ~i 

If the protesting non-partisan women are dishonest in their pro- 
tests they are unworthy of Christian fellowship and ought to be 
excluded from membership in the Church of Christ. 

The recklessness with which Christian character is thus assailed 
indicates the lowered moral tone of our organization. 
^^It is often claimed that I formerly believed in the " third party " 
and advised the Woman's Christian Temperance Union to give its; 
- allegiance to that party. In support of this claim liberal quotations 
are made from my reports and public addresses. As Superintendent 
of Legislation in 1883 I said in my report to the National Convention: 

Every temperance woman ought to oppose by voice and influence the action 
of any party in which it ignores or refuses to submit this question of prohibitory 
and constitutional amendment to the votes of the people. She ought also to sup. 
port the action of any party wherein it commands its representatives to thus aid the 
people in the expression of their will. In some instances this will lead women 
contrary to their otherwise political preferences, but since we believe the prohibi- 
tion of the liquor traffic to be the subject of paramount importance, we are justified" 
in so doing. Vv T e do not thus give ourselves to the support of any party as a party. 



18 

but we do follow wherever we see the white banner of prohibition. Do not be 
afraid of the charge of partisanship. A grand manifesto for principle will be of 
no avail unless the living personality of human effort makes it effective. The 
grand chorus of majorities as in unison they cry, "The saloon must go," shall 
possess no coercive force unless that unison merged into legislative, judicial, 
executive harmony, and guided by the baton of a political party, shall take up the 
strain and still sing on, "The saloon must go, the saloon shall go, and by our 
hand its power is broken." God forbid that any temperance woman should, with 
doubt or discord, weaken the strain or cause the time to drag. 

"The grand chorus of majorities " in Iowa had been secured; the 
people had said, "The saloon must go ;" up to that time the question 
had been wholly non-partisan. Republicans and Democrats and 
Greenbackers had worked and voted together for the Amendment. 

When the nearly 30,000 majority vote was declared, the State 
rejoiced and good people everywhere said, "Well done." Miss Wil- 
lard at that time (it seems a long time ago now) declared Iowa to be 
" Queen and leader of Christian civilization on this continent." But 
the Republican party was very slow to realize that it had any duty 
to the movement. It had previously declared for submission at a non- 
partisan election ; it seemed to feel that its work was done. Its Con- 
vention, immediately following the adoption of the Amendment, made 
no reference to the great popular vote just taken, by which the Consti- 
tution had been amended. 

This was very disappointing to many of us, but since no Legisla- 
ture was to meet the next ensuing winter, we apprehended no real 
danger to prohibition through this silence. When another year had 
passed and the Supreme Court had rendered that strange, unwar- 
ranted, unexpected decision, not against the constitutionality of 
prohibition, but against the validity of the legislative steps which 
preceded its adoption — then the people were aroused to know what 
position the Republican party, as a party, would take. We knew that 
the rank and file of the party were nine-tenths of them Prohibitionists; 
we did not know what action the Convention would take. 

With all this history and these forebodings of possible harm, I 
said (what these years of hot controversy since have strengthened me 
in believing) that a party must stand by the clearly expressed will of 
the people ; not because that will is good, but because it is their will. 

It is a self contradiction to suppose a party could, without com- 
, mitting suicide, long continue to do anything else. 

Party leaders are often so crowded among the machinery of party 
manipulation, and blind and deaf amid the din and smoke of party 
management that they do not clearly see or hear the trend of public 
events among the great people who make law, and who make and 
unmake parties. 



S 



19 

Thus reformers must cry aloud, The people must speak. As a 
reformer I did cry aloud, as one of the people I did speak. I also 
advised all temperance women to do the same thing ; but notice, I did 
not say it was the duty of the Woman's Christian Temperance Union 
to oppose or lend its allegiance to any party as a party. I distinctly 
say, ' ' We do not thus give ourselves to the support of any party as a 
party. " N I say, every temperance woman should oppose the action of 
any party, not oppose the party. What has the W. C. T. TJ. to do 
with tariff or free trade, with hard or soft money, with railroads or 
mines ? Why has a temperance union any right to establish the creed 
of its members on these wholly foreign matters ? 

The idea that such an arrogant assumption of power would ever 
be attempted had never shadowed my vision. Miss Willard's last 
message to the National Convention had been, ' ' I recognize that we 
are a non-partisan society," and when she expressed her belief that the 
Convention should adopt a sympathetic declaration in favor of the 
Independant party movement, known as the Prohibition Home Pro- 
tection party, I did not have a suspicion that she purposed to carry 
the organization bodily to the support of that party. That year, 1882, 
the ninth resolution of the Committee's Report reads, "We rejoice in 
the day that gives recognition to our prohibition principles by politi- 
cal partisans, and we will endeavor to influence the best men in all 
communities to commit themselves to that party, by whatever name 
called, that shall give to them the best embodiment of prohibition 
principles and will most surely protect our homes." 

There is nothing here about committing themselves to any party, 
they are to influence the best man to take the noblest action ; neither 
is the Society pledged to support that "best" party or those best 
men. We then were entrenched in the belief which Miss Willard 
expressed; we were l <A non-partisan society working through moral 
suasion j " we labored for prohibition through the educational agen- 
cies which are the source of growth and development in popular con- 
viction and legislative action. We had not attempted the policy of 
coercion by a direction of our forces to destroy a political party which 
we were not able yet to convince. 

On page 34 it is stated that the position now held by the National 
Woman's Christian Temperance Union is not new, but was taken 
unanimously in 1882 and 1883. The above quotation will show this 
to be incorrect. 

The resolution of 1883 reads as follows: Resolved, "That we 
will lend our influence to that party, by whatever name called, which 
shall furnish the best embodiment of prohibition principles, and will 
most surely protect our homes." 



20 

I was not a member of the Committee on Resolutions that year — 
as the " Facts in the Case " states. 

This resolution does not name the party. It leaves every woman 
free to follow her own political judgment. The women of the South 
found their ( ' protection " in the Democratic party ; Iowa women 
found theirs in the Republican party. Women ranged themselves, if 
at all, where they chose ; a few women thought they saw a promise 
of future protection in the political organization known as the Prohi- 
bition Party. Many women, I among them, rejoiced in the organiza- 
tion of voters to secure the enactment of prohibition laws. I have 
always hailed such organizations with delight proportioned to the 
wisdom of the plans adopted by these organizations. The organiza- 
tions were termed parties in a way which is now misleading. We 
called men who believed in prohibition and voted in a way which they 
thought would soonest secure it, " Prohibitionists. " But they were 
not then, and are not now Prohibitionists in the present party sense. 

We called the 11,000 men who voted for Elias Jessup, 
for Governor of Iowa, " Prohibitionists,*' and they are called 
often the " Prohibition Party," but they were far from the present 
party standard — every other name beside that of Elias Jessup, was 
the regular nominee of the Republican party. 

It was merely sought to make a protest against the regular 
Republican nominee. These facts and conditions must be borne in 
mind by those who desire to arrive at sound conclusions and to give 
righteous judgment of persons and policies. Also it should be noted 
that I did not say, as quoted on page 35, "Every temperance woman 
ought to oppose any party, " but, "oppose the action of any party 
wherein it ignores or refuses to submit this question to the votes of 
the people." "She ought to support the action of any party wherein 
it commands its representatives to thus aid the people in the expres- 
sion of their will." 

Did the ladies who put such stress on these words give their sup- 
port to the Republican party in the several States when it has declared 
for the submission of Constitutional Prohibition ? By no means. 
They have even opposed the election of life-long temperance men who 
were pledged to do that very thing. Is this lending influence "to 
noble political action ? " 

When at the Convention of 1884, at St. Louis, it had become per- 
fectly clear, by the previous action of the General Officers who had 
officially endorsed the candidacy of St. John, that we were all 
expected to wheel into line for the support of one political party, then 
the whole long scheme became quite plain. Some of us with indigna- 
tion and sorrow declared we could not in conscience support that 
party, and furthermore, denied the right of the Society to barter 



21 

away our political influence to any party. From that day we have 
been treated as traitors to temperance and disloyal to the W. C. T. U. 

In absolute fealty to religious conviction and patriotic devotion I 
did advise, and still advise every temperance woman to lend her influ- 
ence and give her personal service to that party which she believes 
gives the best embodiment of prohibition principles, and will most 
surely protect the home. 

I most unqualifiedly state that I believe the Republican party 
does this. Nine-tenths of the voting temperance sentiment of the 
country is embodied in the rank and file of the Republican party. I 
believe every interest of the home is safer by the legal protection 
which its legislators give. 

But I realize that other women's convictions are as precious to 
them as mine are to me ; and I believe it wrong to seek to appropriate 
political influence which is not voluntarily offered. I hail with delight 
any judicious organization of temperance men for political work in the 
interest of temperance. 

I have seen the Republican party in my own State, through agi- 
tation and education within its own ranks, brought to place this 
among the dominant ideas of its party action. In other States the 
same evolution in reform is rapidly going on. I expect yet to see the 
dominant party in the nation, whatever it shall be, thus controlled by 
the temperance sentiment within its own ranks. But to my utter 
amazement I see 300,000 out of our 10,000,000 voters marching under 
a banner, labelled Prohibition, and boastfully opposing the election of 
temperance men who are nominated on any other ticket than their 
own. 

Some of them declare that they do not desire prohibition until it 
can be secured through the agency of their party. They have even of 
late repudiated Local Option, under which, large sections of the 
country have been cleared of saloons. 

Miss Willard is reported to have publicly pledged herself never 
again to work for Local Option. Such a party I utterly repudiate. I 
did so as soon as I became aware that any considerable number of 
intelligent, conscientious men and women would espouse what, to me, 
seems little less than political lunacy. 

The " Facts in the Case" also states, that as Chairman of the 
Committee on Plan of Work, at the Detroit Convention, I reported in 
favor of a Memorial addressed to the National Republican Convention, 
asking it to declare in favor of the submission of a Prohibitory Amend- 
ment to the National Constitution. 

It is true that I presented such a report, but I did it as Chairman 
of the Committee, and only acted in my official relation. 



22 

I did not approve Miss Willard's plan, and was keenly alive to 
what I considered its objectionable features, because as Superintendent 
of Legislation, I would be charged with carrying it out. I 
believed the educational effect of petitions to legislative bodies was 
very good, indeed, the expostulation, " Petition, petition, petition ! " 
had become my well-known shibboleth. 

But political parties are not legislative bodies: they are merely 
convenient agencies for the election of the people's representatives 
in government. The less they have to do with moral reforms not yet 
crystallized into law, the better it is for the reform. I felt then that 
to attempt an agitation of the question of National Constitutional 
Prohibition in the form of a petition to a political party would lead 
ourwomen to overestimate the power of political parties, and to under- 
estimate the necessity of intelligent conviction in the hearts and minds 
of the people. 

Miss Willard knew this and she herself asked that she be empow- 
ered to carry out the action of the Convention ; and to do what my 
official relation to the Society made it my province to perform. 

If I had been a little braver I should have stood for my own con- 
victions, instead of yielding to Miss Willard's importunities. She 
knew very well my objections to her plan, and it is unjust in her to 
allow that official action, which I took in deference to her personal 
wishes, to be cited as a proof of change of purpose or inconsistent 
action. 

Another instance of injustice, dishonorable to Christian contro- 
versy is afforded by the attempt to show that my contention for the read- 
ing of the Iowa Memorial in the late New York Convention, to which it 
was addressed, was inconsistent with my course at the Minneapolis 
Convention when I asked that my protest be received by the Conven- 
tion without reading. 

The cases were quite unlike. The protest offered at Minneapolis 
was signed by individual delegates at the Convention, after the ques- 
tion had been fully discussed. The Memorial offered at the New York 
Convention, was the solemn utterance of the Iowa TV. C. T. U. in 
Annual Convention assembled, and addressed to the National 
Convention. 

As President of the State Society I should have been derelict in 
my duty if I had not made every attempt to secure a hearing for this 
Auxiliary State Union which had thus in due form approached the 
National gathering. 

Not to allow this Memorial read was to deny the right of petition. 
All these facts are quite apparent to any thinking mind. This is not. 
however, all the truth in the case. 



23 

The facts are, that I intended to present my protest at Min- 
neapolis and to ask its reading, but the Executive Committee, through 
Mrs. Lathrop made a most urgent request that I should not do so. 

In the presence of the Committee, Mrs. Lathrop stated that "it 
would do no good.'" — "that I knew a large majority was against me 
—that it would only consume time, etc. I replied that I would yield 
to the majority in everything except a matter of conscience. — that 
this was a matter of conscience with me, and I must file the protest ; 
but in deference to the desire of my sisters of the Executive Commit- 
tee. I agreed not to read it. 

All these facts are well known to Miss Willard and to Mrs. 
Lathrop, and yet they permit, and Miss Willard aids this attempt to 
show an inconsistency which was occasioned by deference to their 
wishes. 

Why does not Miss Willard say, " It is true Mrs. Foster did not 
ask to read the petition, but she yielded her personal desires in defer- 
ence to her sisters." 

She is silent. Is there conspiracy in such silence ? 

Recurring again to my supposed change of views on partisan 
affiliation, a pe7*sonal letter is here given, which in law would be the 
very best evidence of which the case is susceptible. 

It was written by myself to Mrs. Aldrich a few days after the 
Detroit Convention. It will be remembered that it was at this Con- 
vention that I made the report which is quoted as sustaining party 
alliance. I went immediately after the Convention with my husband 
to visit family friends, and "on the train " wrote the letter. I may 
~be excused if I give here the circumstances of its long preservation 
and recent resurrection. 

Mrs. Aldrich had brought from an attic a mass of old letters and 
put them in the stove to burn. As the flame kindled she thought, 
"may-be there is something of value in that lot, " and took them out. 
This letter was among those rescued, with not even the smell of the 
fire on it. She sent it immediately to me with the words, l ' Take 
good care of it ; I feel as if it had been handed me right from heaven." 
Here it is : 

(On train in Canada.) 

November 8th, 1883. 

Dear Mrs. A. — After all the time we were together I left unsaid so many- 
things I wanted to say. * * * [Then follows several pages relating to per- 
sonal matters and the Iowa work, then follows :] 

A Presbyterian minister wrote a poor, weak letter to the Toronto Globe yester- 
day, in opposition to our work and the Detroit Convention. It was after the old 
style — woman's sphere at home, etc. In to-day's issue there is a splendid editor- 
ial in support of our work and even of the ballot. I thank the dear minister that 
he made the occasion. 

I am so thankful we were saved from Mrs. Gougar's plans. 



24 

Did you read the "Lever" article about the Illinois W. C. T. U ? The 
trouble comes from a supposed union of the W. C. T. U. and the Prohibition 
Home Protection party. I do wish the women would let that party and ruery other 
party alone, except as they approve or disapprove action in particular cases. 

I did not like that resolution of Mary Woodbridge's that was offered late the 
last session about laboring to secure the calling of conventions before those of 
political parties, adjourning, etc., and then coming together again, etc. 

I don't think it will amount to much, but it is contrary to our line of policy. 
Well, "In some way or other the Lord will provide, it may not be my way, it 
may not be thy way " 

I am at Marshall, Michigan, next Sunday. I don't know any more. 

Yours, 

Judith Ellen. 

Could anything be better testimony than this ? Can it fail to 
convince those whose minds are unprejudiced ? And further — there 
is another plausible fallacy running through much of the assertion 
which passes for argument : It is claimed that because we passed a 
certain resolution at one Convention, therefore at the next we must 
pass another of like tenor, and that intensity of statement and change 
of policy is progress and is a brave answer to the call ' ' go forward : 
go up and possess the land." 

In construing what a certain convention meant by a certain 
resolution, partisan advocates put into the past the action and posi- 
tion of the present and interpret the former meaning by the necessities 
of the present hour. 

My explanation is, Miss Willard arrives at certain conclusions 
in her own mind, about what our Society ought to do and the posi- 
tions it ought to take. She at once begins her plansto have conven- 
tions so composed and measures so put that her ideals shall take 
shape in words and be adopted by good majorities : She has wonder^ 
ful skill in knowing what not to say, as well as what ought to be said^ 
and how a new departure will be most easily accepted. 

Her course is to so insinuate a doctrine — which she fears will not 
be accepted — with soft words and kindly sentiments and ambiguous 
phrases, that women are unconscious of the '''real inwardness" of 
the resolution or measure. Miss Willard would not thus beguile the 
women to any ppsition which she deemed wrong. She doubtless 
believes it is better to think out these positions for the women, while 
they only feel the glow of admiration for her gentle manners and 
charming words, and are all the time goaded by their own heart- 
breaking sorrows or womanly sympathy with sorrow to follow where 
she leads. Only God knoweth the heart of man — but this we do 
know — that a woman who thinks for herself contrary to Miss Willard, 
very soon falls under the ban of disapprobation. 

Many women prefer the luxurious peace of acquiesence under 
the gentle lullaby — " Blest be the tie that binds." Others remember 
that it is written " first pure, then peaceable. " ,- 



25 

OTHER FACTS IN THE CASE. 

MRS. MARY J. ALDRICH, IOWA. 

That the party action of the National Union could have been taken 
and so persistently maintained without previous discussions in the lo- 
<:al ok State unions, is. a marvellous fact. It is the result of other facts 
not stated by the National officers, but which are necessary to a proper 
-understanding of all " The Pacts in the case." 

It has resulted mainly from the erroneous assumption by the Nation- 
al President that a "sympathetic declaration'' in favor of the Prohi- 
bition party, would not be out of harmony with the recognized non- 
partisan character of the organization (see Louisville, annual address) ; 
this assumption would at once have been denied, but for the freedom 
which it was believed State Auxiliaries had, in the management of 
their own work, to adopt or ignore any line of effort recommended by 
the National Union. 

In National Conventions the vote upon these questions is allowed to 
be in accordance with individual conviction ; but afterwards is con- 
sidered and reported, as the representative action of delegates for con- 
stituencies, that oft times have made no declaration upon the question, 
or are opposed to the party alliance. 

This theory of representative action is absolutely inconsistent with 
the actual facts, and false to the principles of organized work. 

This, and other false theories, are sophistries which ought to be ap- 
parent to any thinking mind, also ' l that States and individuals are 
not bound by any resolutions adopted, or principles espoused by the 
National Union." 

These theories have been persistently up held and conveniently used 
I)y the woman's suffrage, and party leaders, and have been quietly ac- 
quiesced in by an admiring constituency who were unwilling to oppose 
those whom they loved so devotedly, even when they did not altogether 
approve what was done. 

One finds herself as unable to believe theories like these could have 
been ignorantly advanced, as she is unwilling to admit that it has 
t>een craftily done, with an eye to the gradual incorporation of party 
principles and party plans into the work of the National Union — 
ivhich the great body of the women did not really approve, yet the 
facts tend to show this. Another fact connected with the personnel of 
the National Convention has also helped to secure this result. In the 
development of the work of the Union, nearly forty different Depart- 
ments have been constituted, the large proportion of them since the 
election of the present incumbent to the office of President. 

Each Department is in charge of a Superintendant elected by the 
Convention, after having been selected and nominated by the Execu- 



26 

tive Committee which is composed of the General Officers and the 
Presidents of the State Unions. 

In this Executive Committee the choice of the President is scarcely 
ever disputed and a nomination is, nearly if not always, equivalent to 
an election. This gives to National Conventions nearly one hundred 
ex-officio members, more than one half of whom owe their positions to 
the President, and carry out her wishes without one word of dissent • 
this fact the General Officers have not mentioned, but its bearing, 
others can appreciate. 

Another unmentioned fact is the almost slavish devotion of many 
W. C. T. U. women to the President of the National Union, a devo- 
tion so persuasive and potent as to have the binding force of unwritten 
law ; if expressed it would declare the will of the President to be the 
law of the Union ; the force of this -is manifestly apparent in the acts 
of the Society. 

If a measure which she wishes to have carried, is in danger of de- 
feat, she has but to speak a few words in its favor, and it is adopted ; 
the discussion of the Blair Bill at Nashville illustrates this. If a 
measure she deems unwise is in danger of adoption, she has but to say 
enough to show her thought about it, and it it is defeated, as in the 
" loyalty resolution" of Mrs. Rounds at the New York Convention. 

This absurd and unreasonable homage paid to the National Presi- 
dent which secures unquestioning compliance with her wishes in the 
prosecution of her plans, was once significantly illustrated in an Ex- 
ecutive Committee meeting where the re-nomination of a Superinten- 
dent of one of the Departments was being considered. 

It was a department as important in its reference to the success of 
temperance work, and broad in its scope, as any earned on by the So- 
ciety, and the pre-eminent success already achieved by the Superin- 
tendent had been most wonderful ; yet objections to her re-nomination 
Avere earnestly presented, among others, that this lady had declared 
that -'Miss Willard was not a safe leader*' and "when the Convention 
rose to receive the President elect, this Superintendent remained in 
her seat." Could party spirit ever descend to anything more pitiful ? 
And this was soberly presented as a reason why this Superintendent 
should be deposed ! 

The records of the National Union also reveal that three distinct 
lines of effort are now aggressively advocated which were not contem- 
plated in the work of the Union — viz., Woman's Suffrage, Party Prohi/' 
Jbition — and the Ecclesiastical Emancipation of Women. 

These lines of work are only indirectly related to the main work 
of the Society ; viz., the overthrow of the Drink Habit and the Drink 
Traffic ; but every one of them is directly calculated to divide the 



27 

membership and break that unity of effort and feeling, so marked in 
the beginning, and so desirable for success. 

A careful study of the records will also show that in the introduc- 
tion of these lines of work, there has been an indejiniteness in the pre- 
liminary statements, or resolutions fast presented, which is not in ac- 
cord wjth perfect candor ; and action has been frequently taken with- 
out such a discussion as would illucidate the actual meaning and ten- 
dancy of the proposed measure, and render intelligent and harmonious 
.action possible. 

The records will also show that such approval by past Conventions 
.of such resolutions or expressions, has afterward been made the basis 
for advanced expressions and continued approval and when one sees 
that this same course of action has been carried out in the introduc- 
tion of every one of these lines of effort, one can hardly think it is ac- 
cidental, or attribute it to a gradual growth of conviction in the minds 
of the leaders, concerning the principles upon which these lines are 
based : — but to a craftiness of expression, a diplomacy of effort, and 
a persistency of purpose ivhich would be condemned as demagogic in 
politicians. 

In this case it undoubtedly results from false theories held concern. 
ing individual and representative action in Delegate Conventions, and 
of the province of the National Union to give the key note of expres- 
sion upon principles and methods, in the expectation that State Aux- 
iliaries and individual members will come up to the concert pitch of 
the National, with ultimate harmony of effort. 

For proof, compare the guarded expressions in the first resolutions 
favoring woman's suffrage; then the plea that we were asking only for 
Home Protection, the ballot on the temperance question ; then for the 
removal of all restrictions because of sex, and equal civil and political 
rights ; again — turn to the plea for a " sympathetic declaration" from 
the non-partisan Union with the Prohibition Party ; then the assertion 
that we ought of right to give them our support ; then the declaration 
that we will continue to give them our influence ; and at last the dec- 
laration that the National Union is ' l almost solidly partisan ; and all 
this before local unions have ever discussed the subject, and when the 
General Officers of the National Union openly discourage such dis- 
cussion lest it divide them in their local work, all coupled with a gen- 
eral tone of expression and manner that would make loyalty to prohi- 
bition principles depend upon adherence to the so-called Prohibition 
Party. 

And again, see the statement concerning action in favor of ecclesi- 
astical emancipation of women. The establishment of an order of dea- 
conesses was left by the Convention as a subject of discussion for one 
vear before definite action is taken, but the detailed plan of their 



28 

education, and the graduation in 1892 of the first class, was all given 
us and the already selected instructor of these deaconesses, in less than 
three months after this merely tentative action had been taken by the 
Convention. 

This same imperfect analysis of theories and facts, with consequent 
illogical conclusions united to cautiousness of statement which is hard- 
ly fair, is apparent in the principles laid down and facts recited in the 
Reason Why and the Facts in the Case, making them a one-sided and 
partial exposition of the past and present action of the [National Union 
in the incorporation of these lines of work into the policy of the Society. 

These views concerning "The Facts in the Case" are expressed re-. 
gretfully and from a sense of duty; these conclusions have been reached 
very reluctantly by some who were aforetime the almost worshipper? 
of her who has been styled the "best loved woman in America." 

Through crucifixion of heart these conclusions have been reached, 
with the pain of a consciousness that many enthusiastic admirers are 
now unable to critically consider and judicially decide upon anything 
which the subject of such adoration may propose to have done : nor 
the gladness with which the bidding of the same leader would be done 
in non-partisan work as of yore, by those who must dissent from her 
partisan leadership. 

The recovery from such slavish admiration has been slow, and noth- 
ing but an honest difference of opinion concerning a question of right 
and justice could have brought it about, and to-day the writer would 
be glad to believe that the object of this past admiration was just what, 
and all that, which imagination had pictured her to be, the most won- 
derful woman of our time ; an able, accomplished, and safe leader for 
the 1ST. W. C. T. U. 

However great the reluctance to speak plainly, the time seems to de- 
mand it, and from a review of all " The Facts in the Case" there does- 
seem to have been manifested in the Genesis and the Exodus of this 
party work in the National Union, more of the wisdom of the serpent r 
than the harmlessness of the dove — not consciously perhaps — yet one 
can scarcely understand how any truly and sincerely conscientious 
christian woman can fail to see the politic leading, which closely re- 
sembles craftiness, the lack of candor in statement which borders on 
untruthfulness, and the injustice of the persistent refusal to recognize 
the claim of the opponents of the partisan policy, to the absolute con- 
trol of their own political influence which lacks only power to make it 
tyranny. 

The effort of the leaders to set the key note of the National Union 
in favor of adherence to one political party — to utilize the entire ma- 
chinery of the organization, its lecture force, its literature, everything 



29 

for the furtherance of the party work without any intelligent discus- 
sion of this question by the women of the local unions ; — these leaders 
even recommending that the unions do not discuss this question, looks 
like a definite purpose to unite, manipulate, direct and dispose of the 
aggregate political influence of all these women, and is, not only out 
of harmony with the genius of our Republican Institutions, but would 
be subversive of their purity and continuance — were these women vo- 
ters — and this power undisputed. 

Then when one remembers that the President of this same N. W, CL 
T. U. which has its own official organ successfully established in its 
own publishing house, through which it can send broad-cast its own 
partial statement of u The Facts in the Case," its own Lecture Beau- 
reau to whom no one is admitted who does not endorse the policy of 
the Union concerning those controverted points, is also the leader of 
the International Council of Women, to which nine woman's organiza- 
tions are auxiliary, one begins to wonder whereunto it will all grow ;.. 
— how long women will be thus led without any apprehension of the 
false theories, or any revolt against the wrong methods under which it 
is done, or if such organized work of women can long go on without 
detriment to the women themselves, to the reforms they are advocating^ 
to the State and the Church. 

The actual results to be accomplished, coming events can alone 
reveal, but the present conditions and future possibilities make the 
question of solemn moment and all " The Facts in the Case" worthy of 
prayerful consideration and well-considered action. 



S 



30 



THE WOMAN'S TEMPERANCE PUBLICATION ASSOCIATION. 

MRS. J. ELLEN FOSTER. IOWA. 

The Woman's Temperance Publication Association is a stock- 
corporation, a •• related interest " of the National Woman's Christian 
Temperance Union. It is managed by a Board of Directors elected 
by the stockholders. It publishes : 

The Union Signal, published weekly. Price $1.50 per annum. 
Mary Allen West. Editor. Miss Julia Ames, Associate Editor. 

The Deutsch-Amerikaner. (The Temperance German paper, > 
published monthly. Price 50 cents per annum. 

The Young Crusader, published weekly. Price 50 cents per 
annum. Alice M. Guernsey. Editor. 

The Sunday-School Crusader, published monthly. Price 15 cents 
per annum. Alice M. Guernsey. Editor. 

Oak and Ivy Leaf. (The Y. W. C. T. U. Organ.) published 
monthly. Price 25 cents per annum. Margaret A. Sudduth. Editor. 

Also a few books and many leaflets and tracts. 

It is controlled and managed by' women, and is a grand illustra- 
tion of business enterprise and educational activity. Its financial 
condition is reported good, and its promises of future growth 
brilliant. Its Monthly Readings are very generally used by the 
Local Unions — they are prepared by acknowledged authorities on 
various lines of temperance work. 

Miss Willard prepared the one for February. 18S9. She chose 
this convenient and willing medium through which to attack Mrs. 
Foster by name, and to malign the personal character and work of 
many non-partisan women. 

Let it be noted. Miss Willard often declares that States and 
individuals are free to adopt or reject the party policy of the National 
Union — but if they exercise this liberty, they fall under the censure 
of this and other productions of her pen. 

Her words are smooth and sometimes plausible. If true, they 
afford evidence that non-partisan women are guilty of duplicity 
amounting to criminality. If not true what shall save them from the 
condemnation of the "idle words" of which the scripture speaks ? 

God save us all from the condemnation of passing unrighteous 
judgment! 



REVIEW OF MISS WILLARD'S MONTHLY READING OF THE 
RELATION OF THE N. W. C. T. IT. TO POLITICS. 

BY MRS. M. J. ALDRICIJ, IOWA. 

It is a surprise to us that the Reading begins quite as abrupt as it 
does, — that President Willard omitted to mention the relation to 
politics which the Union formerly held, simply making an apologetic 
statement of its present partisan relation and what she is pleased to 
call ''attacks " upon it. 

In order to fully understand both sides of the controversy growing 
out of this partisan relation of the National, every Union should be 
cognizant of all the facts relating to, and of the principles involved in 
the dispute. 

To properly state the relation of the National Union to politics, so 
that LTnions shall correctly understand it, omitted facts in the his- 
tory of that relation pailt and present, should have been given, with 
the principles upon which the different relations are based. 

It is an important fact that up to 1881, women of all political par- 
ties worked for the principles of Total Abstinence and Prohibition on a 
basis of union' gospel and political temperance work, but with no 
mention of party politics in the Unions : — that the orignal relation 
of the Union was non-partisan, though it could not properly be called 
non-political, for any work which concerns government, legislation to 
be repealed or secured, is political work — though not necessarily 
party work. 

The object of the National Union is not only to secure the sup- 
pression of the evils of temperance ; it includes both the promotion of 
total abstinence habits, and the prohibition of the legal liquor traffic. 
This last cannot be accomplished without political action at the bal- 
lot box and in legislative halls. 

The Union is therefore not only a religious and moral but a 
political society though doing its work through educational and moral 
methods. 

Total abstinence is a moral reform advocated on moral economic, 
scientific and gospel reasons. Prohibition is a legislative reform 
advocated on moral, religious and political principles. Scientific 
Temperance Instruction is an educational political reform. 

Women Suffrage is also a political reform, advocated on both 
civil and moral reasons ; and these are all included in the Gospel and 
political work of the N. W. C. T. U. 



A 



For seven years the Union was a non-partisan society pushing 
its lines of political work without one hint of party work. It held a 
relation to politics as broad and general as the principles of govern- 
ment which it advocated, a relation which did not interfere in the least, 
with the undisputed right of every member of the Union to the con- 
trol and disposal of her own political influence in accordance with her 
own party preferences. It is only four years since the vote of the 
majority brought it into a partisan relation to politics, — a far infer- 
ior and one which not only imposes severe limitations of power and 
usefulness until the party espoused becomes dominant, but interferes 
with the right of the minority to the entire control of their political 
influence, because the majority have pledged the influence of all. to 
one particular party, regardless of individual party references. 

There are facts connected with this changed relation which should 
have been given for the information of those who have not attended 
the National Convention or had access to the National Minute — if 
''•all the points in the controversy" were to be presented in this 
Reading and the Facts in the Case — issued by the General Officers 
of the N. W. C. T. U. Some of these will be now reviewed before 
the Reading is taken up. 

It was at Washington in 1881 that the President of the X. W. C. 
T. U. first asked us " here at the nation's Capital to pledge our 
allegiance to the new part}' which she prophesied would unite North 
and South, help on the work of Constitutional Prohibition, and the 
enfranchisement of women." 

This request fell upon unheeding ears. At Louisville in 1882 in 
her address, she recognized that we were a " non-partisan society," 
but she askedfor a sympathetic declaration in favor of this independent 
party movement, " believing as she said, that "this non- partisans 
Convention of women could utter a note of warning to partisans, and 
thus serve the cause of constitutional prohibition better than by 
silence. " 

At this Convention was adopted the resolution which has since 
been claimed as the foundation of the partisan action afterward 
taken by the National Union. 

Mrs. Florence Miller was the representative of Iowa on that Com- 
mittee of Resolutions and this resolution was her part of the work. 

She is a woman who has never yet said or written one word in 
favor of party prohibition work, and she knows how to use language 
which expresses what she means. It reads as follows in the Minutes 
of that Convention. — " Ninth." — We rejoice in the advance made along 
*the line of Constitutional Prohibition during the past year. We hail 
the successes in Iowa and Kansas, and the activity in other States 
for securing prohibition by this method, as harbingers of the swiftly 



33 

when with the majority of the States fixed upon the 
foundation of constitutional law ( prohibiting the liquor traffiic ) they 
shall be able to engraft this principle upon the National Constitution. 
We rejoice in the day that gives recognition to our prohibition princi- 
ples by political partisans and we will endeavor to influence the besi 
/'men in all communities to commit themselves to that party, by what- 
ever name called, that shall give to them the best embodiment of pro- 
hibition principles, and will most surely protect our home. 

We reaffirm the position taken the last year at Washington 
which gives States the privilege of choosing such methods as are 
warranted by public sentiment and demanded by the exigencies of the 
situation, believing that God's means for the overthrow of the liquor 
traffiic, and the uplifting of the standard for God and Home and 
Native Land will be developed in the use of these various methods." 
Only those whose minds were desiring an expression in favor of party 
prohibition work, could see it in this resolution. Each State was to 
do its political work through such political agencies and methods as 
the public sentiment and the exigencies of their work demanded; there 
is not a hint of national unity in party work. 

The X. W. C. T. U. was still non-partisan except in the purpose 
of its leaders. The annual address of President Willard at Detroit is 
a curious laudation of Constitutional Prohibition, and of party pro- 
hibition methods, implying that the Union could be, and urging it to 
be, committed to and work for, non-partisan and party prohibition 
methods at one and the same time. 

There is an apparent ignorance of or blindness to the fact that a 
temperance organization cannot successfully carry on party prohibi- 
tion and non-partisan prohibition work at one and the same time. 
This confusion of ideas in regard to party political work which is alone 
proper for an organization like our Union, — is manifested in all that 
has been done and said in the direction of party W. C. T. U. work. 

The political motives of the women advocating it are undoubtedly 
pure, their views sincere and their purposes good ; but the premises 
are false and the conclusions consequently unsound. The practical 
result of the party work in the Union, has been — dissensions, which 
threaten more and more to divide this wonderful organization of 
women upon the question of methods while they are actually united 
in heart concerning prohibition principles. 

There has been a confounding of prohibition principles with party 
methods for promoting these principles, that creates a tendency 
among all advocating it to make adherence to the prohibition party 
method, a test of loyalty to the principle of prohibition. 

The loyalty resolution of Mrs. Rounds at the New York Convention 
was the logical sequence of this partisan relation — and if the partisan 



34 

relation of the N. W. C. T. U. is right, the resolution should have 
been adopted. But that relation is wrong and unjust and the 
resolution if adopted, with power to enforce it, would be not only 
unwise but tyrannical in the extreme — without that power, it is 
absurd. 

The next act in this drama of changing the non-partisan relation 
of the N. W. C. T. TJ. to a partisan relation to politics, was enacted 
at Detroit, where the following resolution was passed — 5 — "We will\ 
lend our influence to that party by whatever name called, which shall \ 
furnish the best embodiment of prohibition principles, and will most 
surely protect our homes." ^S 

This has been claimed as authorizing the committal of the N. W. 
C. T. U. to the Prohibition Party during the Presidential Campaign 
in 1884 — but it was not so intended by the member of the Committee 
offering it, Mrs. S. V. Maxfield of Iowa. Before presenting the 
resolution to the Committee she submitted it to the Iowa delegation, 
suggesting that it should read — " We will lend our influence to that 
party, by whatever name called in our several states, which shall fur- 
nish, etc." It was decided that insertion of the words "in our several 
states " was not necessary as the policy of the National was to leave 
each state free in its own political action. 

The action of the Executive Committee at Detroit, after Conven- 
tion, has also been claimed as authorizing the subsequent party work. 
I was a member of that Committee and present at that meeting. 
President Willard understood the recommendation of a Memorial as 
ordered by the Convention to be an endorsement of her recommenda- 
tion of a Petition for general circulation, to be presented to the 
nominating conventions of the different political parties the following 
year. 

The majority of the Committee, myself among the number, did 
not so understand the vote of the Convention. A memorable discus-' 
sion followed which resulted in an almost unanimous vote of the 
Committee in favor of granting President Willard's desire that the 
circulation of the Petition be ordered. I believed in the educational 
work its circulation would do for the cause as thoroughly as did 
President Willard, and voted for ordering it. I also voted to grant 
her request that the details of this Petition work be left in her hand?, 
but without due consideration, for the prolonged discussion made 
adjournment necessary, in order that those who were to leave the 
city that night might not miss their trains ; and the impropriety of 
the Executive Committee thus taking the work out of the hands of 
the Superintendent of Petitions and Legislation, Mrs. J. Ellen Foster, 
who was not in favor of it as President Willard knew, did not occur 
to me until afterward. 



35 

This action of the Committee did revoke the order of the Conven- 
tion, but it did not authorize President Wilted, or the General 
Officers of the National, to pledge the support of the Union to any 
party that might grant the prayer of the Memorial. 

That question was not before the Committee at all. The circula- 
tion of the Petition was subsequently given up, as the action of the 
Committee occasioned wide-spread dissatisfaction, and the Memorial 
as ordered by the Convention was presented to the political coven- 
tions — approved by the Greenback, — given a respectful hearing by 
the Republican, which referred it to the Committee on Resolutions. 
and ignored by the Democratic Convention. 

Following the presentation of these Memorials to these Conven- 
tions came the official call, of President Willard, for State Unions to 
send delegates to the National Prohibition Party Convention. Her 
participation in that Convention, and endorsement of the party 
nominations and work, as the official representatives of the N. W. C. 
T. U. — all of which had not been authorized, misrepresented thous- 
ands of women — women of the Union. 

Then came the St. Louis Convention in 1884, when lor the first 
time the women in Convention voted to "lend their influence to the 
Prohibition party," though the resolution said " We will continue to 
lend our influence," and at the same time declared that they were a 
non-political society, that states and individuals were not bound by 
this action, but were free from any relation to this party action, if 
they so choose. 

It would be difficult to find more plausible sophistries and glar- 
ing inconsistencies in the political declaration of any society, than were 
contained in this St. Louis resolution, — all the result of a confusion of 
ideas on the part of those who favored party prohibition work. At 
Philadelphia in 1885 a similar resolution was adopted. 

At Minneapolis the next year, — 1886 — the St. Louis resolution 
was reaffirmed with the addition of the Minneapolis "gag law" which 
was to prevent the discussion of political resolutions at future Con- 
ventions. On page 39 of " Facts in the Case" this action seems to 
be commended, when it is said that "thanks to this resolution, the 
Nashville Convention was spared the repetition of the thrice told 
discussion." How any intelligent woman who believes in freedom of 
discussion in the Annual Meeting of our National Union, could sus- 
tain that resolution, is incomprehensible. 

At Nashville, anon-partisan amendment to the constitution (notice 
of which had been properly given.) was tabled immediately, and 
harmony reigned supreme. At New York similar harmony was 
secured by concerted measures for the complete suppression of all 
discussion of the political position of a great National Union, which 



36 

through these "tolerant" methods had become, as President Willard 
declared "'almost solidly partisan." 

At the opening session of the Convention, before even it was in 
order for President Willard to entertain the motion, which she was 
evidently expecting would be made. Mrs. Monroe, President of the 
Ohio Union, moved that all Memorials be referred to the Executive 
Committee without reading. The motion carried by an overwhelming 
majority, thus denying the Right of Petition until such time and in 
such manner as the Executive Committee might see fit to grant. The 
answer to the Iowa Memorial as prepared by a Sub-Committee of the 
Executive Committee consisting of three of the most intense partisans, 
was brought into the Convention after nine o'clock the last night of 
the Convention and adopted without any opportunity for its discussion, 
President Willard even ignoring, ignorantly or willfully, the right of 
an Iowa woman to speak, who stood through the taking of the vote, 
claiming the right to speak to the question, and who so informed the 
President after the vote was announced; a parliamentary discourtesy 
which has been severely censured, and rightly so. 

This review of facts shows how the present partisan relation of the 
National Union, was brought about, without any discussion of the 
question by its State auxiliaries or the local unions of which they are 
composed ; and the National Officers even now dissuade State Presi- 
dents from encouraging the discussion of the question in the local 
unions. 

The National Union is made up of State and Territorial Unions 
which consist of the local unions. Without any discussion of this 
question in the local unions, a truly representative vote caa never be 
taken in the National Union, and all the party action of the N. W. C. 
T. U. has been contrary to the principles of just political representa- 
tives as well as christian equity, and in violation of individual political 
rights. 

We are now ready to review the Reading of President Willard 
in which Reading, truth and error, fact and falacy, reason and 
sophistry are so interwoven that to separate them, is like 
unravelling a piece of curious tapestry of mixed stuffs, thread by 
thread. It is a poor apology for the National Union and its partisan 
action, to represent the criticisms of the Republican press upon the 
last National Conventions as "attacks," upon the N. W. C. T. U 
and its officers. The reading contains also several erroneous and 
misleading statements. 

The Memorial adopted by the Iowa Union printed in their own 
State paper and sent out to the W. C. T. U. women of other States, 
with cited evidence sustaining the charge of evil results from 
partisan W. C. T. U. work, was the respectful prayer of an auxiliary 



37 

Union for the rescinding of the party action for reasons given, and it 
is unworthy of christian women to represent the censure which the 
National Union received because of its treatment of that Memorial as 
a mere personal or partisan "attack." It is scarcely candid or fair to 
place the odium of opposition to party W. C. T. U. work upon 
Republicans alone, or to imply that when local unions have withdrawn 
from auxiliaryship it was due to the fact, that the members were 
the wives and daughters of Republicans and therefore the Union 
could not be non-partisan — as if a Union any more than a church in 
which all the members are Republicans need to be partisan in its 
temperance and religious work. 

The fact is, there are Prohibition Party women, and Democratic 
prohibition women who oppose the party W. C. T. U. work as 
vigorously as Republican women, but President Willard and other 
Prohibition Party advocates fail to recognize any other opposition. 

She compares the committal of the National Union to the support 
of the Prohibition Party by resolutions adopted in National Convention 
to the adoption of resolutions by Ministers in a Methodist Conference ; 
but the comparison is misleading, the situation is not analogous. 
Methodist ministers do not go to Conference as the elected represen- 
tatives of the churches; their resolutions as to support of political 
partisan candidates, does not pledge the influence of their churches 
to that party or that candidate ; while the committal of the National 
Union to the support of the Prohibition Party, by the representatives 
of the local unions was representative and did pledge the influence of 
the Unions, a pledge that was not only unauthorized by any action of 
the Unions but was an unpardonable interference with the right of 
every woman in the Union to exercise her political influence in 
accordance with her own preferences. 

To say that the " minority'" have claimed that their money went 
"directly" into political channels through the N. W. C. T. U. is a 
mistatement. They have never claimed that; but they do claim that 
the money out of which the salaries of the National Officers are paid is 
contributed by women who do not, as well as women who do, believe 
in party work, that these Officers do their political party work in their 
representative and official capacity and therefore the money of the 
minority is indirectly used in party work to which they are 
conscientiously opposed. Were all those who repudiate the applica- 
tion of their money to partisan purposes, even in the payment of 
salaries, to withhold their dues, until the Union returned to its 
original non-partisan position, President Willard might realize more 
than she now does the extent of this dissent from the partisan action 
of the National. The evasion concerning the Union Signal and the 
Woman's Temperance Publication Association, whose finances are 



• 38 

separate from the National Union is too pitiful for notice. The issue 
of partisan literature by that House with the endorsement of the 
National Union is not in harmony with the object for which the funds 
were subscribed, though present stockholders may now approve it. 

We are told that the leaders of the National Union would have 
declared in favor of the Republican or any other party that declared 
in favor of prohibition principles ; but the fact remains that they did 
not declare in favor of the Greenback party in '84 though that party 
has always looked with more or less favor on Prohibition, and Woman 
Suffrage, 

In the Reading, President Willard tells us that the Prohibition 
Party leaders never asked the W. C. T. U. to stand by them — and in 
the "Glimpses of Fifty Years" she tells us that she was invited to 
attend the Prohibition Convention in Cleveland, in 1880, but declined 
to go, not having then been converted to that political faith. Before 
1881, she was ready to consider this (l proposal" of the Prohibition 
Party leaders and to begin the work of coaxing all W. C. T. U. 
women to "marry the party" as one of them has stated that the 
National Union has done. 

It took three }*ears of planning and persuasion to accomplish it 
and then only because of the famous by-law that ' ' no State Union 
shall be bound by any principle espoused or plan devised by the N. 
W. C. T. U." etc. 

The partisan action of the National could never have been taken 
had it not been for the deception contained in this by-law. 

The Kennett Square Union Resolutions in the "Reading," show 
that they fail to see the false philosophy of it in relation to political 
work. It is that fallacy which makes the maintain ance of the party 
position possible, and that alone. It is because the freedom of the 
State, County and local Unions to elect what particular lines of 
Department work, established by the National, they will engage in, 
is supposed to extend to the political action also, that this partisan 
action is not actively opposed : — whereas in fact, no Union or 
individual is left free to elect whether they will or will not be repre- 
sented by the partisan resolutions adopted and reaffirmed each year, 
by the Majority in the National Convention. 

It is the one act of the National Union that is national, and rests 
like a pall over all our other work. So long as we remain in 
connection with the National Union, so long we all stand before the 
world represented by that action, whether we indorse it or not. 

*In the public thought, the work of local and State Unions, which 
by their Constitutions are declared to be non-partisan, is to-day 
prejudiced and hindered by the partisan position of the National 
and will be so long as that position is maintained. 



39 

President Willard truthfully said in '85 before the annual meeting 

of the Ohio W. C. T. U. "the adoption of the partisan resolution gave 

/'the influence of the organization ' in its entirety' to the Prohibition' 

/Party." And that party boasts of being sustained by theN.W. C. T. U. 

which includes both the partisan majority and the non-partisan minority. 

The partisan action of the National rests upon the assumed right 
of the majority to dispose of and transfer the political influence of the, 
minority, even against their protest. It is an usurpation of authority ; 
no majority has that right ; and yet objection is made to its being 
called political robbery and tyranny. The " Reading" tells us that a 
resolution making a political test of loyalty was offered at New York 
Convention, and the Convention refused to consider it — but it does 
not tell that not one of the majority objected to it because it would be 
wrong to pass it, that President Willard only said that it would be 
u 71 wise to do so at present — with not a word about the injustice of it. 
•"tVe are told 'that "The personal convictions of the majority deter- 
mine the passage of resolutions in every society" but we are not told 
that no majority has any right to infringe the rights of the minority, 
which is done in the passage of these partisan resolutions, — the 
majority either can't or won't see that truth. 

Mrs. Hoffman showed the spirit of their action clearly at Phila- 
delphia, when she said "If the minority don't like it, they may step 
down and out." The words were apologized for afterwards but the 
spirit of the action has been and still is the same. 

We are told that "The Iowa W. C. T. U. has gone on all 
these years, a strictly non-partisan but really Republican society, 
with no attempt on the part of the National W. C. T. U. to interfere 
with it," which settles the question of "gag law" and "intolerant" 
methods for all reasonable minds." 

How could any one believe or publish such an absurd 
statement ? The Iowa Union could not be a strictly non-partisan and 
really a Republican society. Non-partisan and partisan Union work 
at one and the same time is absolutely impossible — the} r can no more 
affinitize than can oil and water — there is no political potash that can 
unite them. 

The Department work of the National Union, which ought to be 
entirely free from partisanship, really suffers to-day from the blighting 
effects of the partisan action of the National Union though each 
Superintendent tries to do her work through non-partisan methods. 
The Iowa State Union has been, and is, a strictly non-partisan Union 
— containing members whose individual party preferences ally them to 
the Republican, Democratic, Greenback and Prohibition parties; with 
no action taken by the State Union that will interfere with these 
preferences, or infringe the rights of the minority in committing all the 



40 

members to the support of one party ; President Willard need give 
the National Union no special credit for tolerance or non-interference 
with the Iowa Union. The National has no constitutional right to 
interfere with this State Union in its non-partisan work, but it has 
done, and is now doing, all it can in various ways to injure the influ- 
ence of the President of the Iowa Union as an advocate of Prohibition, 
and a true W. C. T. U. woman, and to stir up partisan strife in Iowa 
to the end that the partisan action of the National may, in the near 
future, be endorsed by the only State Union, that has freely discussed, 
openly and steadfastly opposed, that action. 

Whether the partisan minority will succeed in Iowa in the future 
remains to be seen — but if it does, it will not make that action right. 

A study of the principles of the two irreconcilable methods of 
Union prohibition work, ought to lead to the rescinding, or at least 
the suspension of the partisan position, enabling us once more to go 
on in the even tenor of the original non-partisan Union work for the 
principles of Total Abstinence and Prohibition, with all that clusters 
about that work in our W. C. T. U., and with no reference to any 
party. 

We should remember that when we have convinced the people of 
the " truth" and won them to the love of it. that parties will right 
themselves, for parties are made up of people. 

It is the truth that '" rules the people: " it is the truth that is to 
make the people free. 

We should remember too that our work for the incorporation of 
the great questions of christian progress into the " realm of government 
through the gateway of politics," which is "the science of 
government " does not make it our duty or give us the privilege of 
dictating the party politics of a single member of our Union. 

That is a question for the individual alone to settle, according 
to the dictates of her own conscience, as God gives her to see the 
right, and no organization has the right, by its vote, to settle the 
question for a single member of that organization. The conflict of 
opinion, the strife of partisanship, which has divided and weakened 
the National Union, has been a torture to many; but God can over- 
rule the mistake so as to lead to a better, broader, purer political 
work by women in the future — let us pray that He will. 



41 



REVIEW OF MISS WILLARD'S MONTHLY READING— ON THE 
RELATION OF THE N. W. C. T. TJ. TO POLITICS. 



First. The criticisms of the general public upon the partisan 
policy of the National Woman's Christian Temperance Union are 
characterized as attacks of the Republican press. As though these 
criticisms were animated by unworthy partisanship or ignorant 
prejudice. 

Does the Woman's Christian Temperance Union claim infallibil- 
ity ? Does it ask the support and confidence of the American public, 
and at the same time resent any questioning of its motives or 
methods ? 

Christian ministers and the religious press contain quite as 
strong expressions of regret and clear settings forth of the harm 
which has come to our work by the partisan action of the National 
Union. Do these regrets arise from partisan malice or blindness ? 

Second. In speaking of me, Miss Willard says : "Mrs. Foster, 
President of the Woman's National Republican Club, has sent out 
documents, etc." In an official letter the President of the National 
Union should speak of a State President as a State President ; she 
utterly ignores this and refers to what she claims I am doing as a 
Republican. She brings me and my utterances to the party test, and 
thus illustrates and fulfills the prophecy of the Philadelphia Protest — 
that party beliefs would be made a test of W. C. T. U. standing. 

I am willing to be tried by W. C. T. U. standards, before the- 
W. C. T. U. membership, but my Republicanism is not a proper sub- 
ject of review in the official utterances of the W. C. T. U. 

Neither will this statement concerning circulation of non-partisan 
literature bear the test of absolute truth ; I have in no sense violated 
the equities of our organization. 

In my Republican party work I have sent documents far and 
wide : thousands of women in this country are in sympathy with the 
truths they contain. I did not exclude W. C. T. U. women from 
their circulation and perusal ; I sought only to reach all womem whom 
I believed would be interested and profited by them. 

There are many loyal Woman's Christian Temperance Union 
women who dare to think for themselves and to exercise the right of 
Americans in the expression of political beliefs, even though such 



42 

beliefs are contrary to the propaganda of the National Woman's 
Christian Temperance Union. 

Would Miss Willard presume to claim that a W. C. T. U; woman 
must be cut off from giving and receiving political information 
through ordinary channels ? I have never used my official relations 
to strengthen my party work. 

Third. She claims that Republican women have passed resolu- 
tions censuring the National and State Unions. Does she mean that 
their protest has its source in their Republicanism ? 

Does she intend to impugn the motives of the women who solemnly 
declare that they protest by resolution and otherwise because they 
believe the partisan position is wrong and is harmful to the temper- 
ance work ? 

If she does not so intend to construe the action of the protesting 
women who pass these resolutions why does she call them Republican 
women, and why does she fail to state that ''third party " women 
also protest ? A half truth is a most dangerous form of error. 

Mrs. Swift, President of the Pennsylvania Union, is a " third 
party" woman; her honored husband, — now deceased, — for years 
voted that ticket. 

Mrs. Lovell, of that same State, is a protesting woman; if she 
had a vote she would give it for "third party" candidates. 

Mrs. Campbell, who presided at the Non-partisan meeting during 
the New York Convention, is also a "third party " sympathizer ; she 
is the author of the non-partisan amendment to the National Constitu- 
tion which will come up for action next year. 

So also in the South are many Democrats among our women. 
They stoutly declare they will not bring party politics into our tem- 
perance work. It is not true that Republican women are the only 
protestants ; neither is it true that the women who protest do so 
because of their individual party preferences. 

Fourth. It is claimed that this new movement is " strictly politi- 
cal," and that unions less "way wise" than others are blinded by 
specious pretenses. Why are not these pretenses enumerated and 
their folly or untruth shown ? If the party alliance of the National 
Union is justifiable and desirable, why do the General Officers attempt 
to stop discussion ? 

Those who are conscious of sound foundations have nothing to 
fear from discussion. 

Soon after the New York Convention the General Officers issued 
this appeal : 



43 

The General Officers earnestly urge all State presidents to counsel all locat 
auxiliaries that inasmuch as the N. \Y. C. T. U. has never urged upon any State 
or local union any action relative to its relation to politics it is hardly essential for 
any State auxiliary to introduce the question to its auxiliaries. 

The better way is in the future, as in the past, to reach conclusions through 
individual conviction and not to bring up the subject in connection with our local 
work. 

The general declaration of the National, or a State or County Convention, id a 
wiser method than to urge a definite position in every local union. Xo National 
Officer has ever advised this, and we are confident that our State presidents will 
follow in this matter the example and advice of their 

General Officers. 
Chicago, Nov. 26, 18S8. 

Intolerance often confesses its real injustice by attacking the per- 
son of its victim when it should show the inconsistency of the doctrine 
taught. It was so in the Saviour's time. The high priest asked 
Jesus of his disciples and of his doctrine, and was struck by an officer 
who stood by and was offended at the manner of His reply when Jesus 
answered, "If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil, but if 
well why smitest thou me ? " 

The success which has attended non-partisan measures and the 
work of non- partisan women is the best vindication of the personnel 
and character of the work. If our work is evil, let our opposers bear 
witness of its evil. Their failure to do so is made more conspicuous 
by their attacks upon us. 

Fifth. The President of the Maine Union is quoted as asking if 
a Woman's Christian Temperance Union composed of Republicans 
only, could be a non-partisan society ? Certainly. The society is 
non-partisan when it takes no position in party politics. The claim 
of non-partisans is that Union work and Union action shall be non- 
partisan. 

I am a Republican — always was, never had any leanings to any 
other political faith — have never concealed my Republicanism ; am 
strengthened in my belief in the party by my personal acquaintance 
with many of its leaders, and with the rank and file of its voters, but I 
never in any manner pledged my sisters of the W. C. T. U. to my pol- 
itical faith or sought to give their W. C. T. U. influence to the party 
I am glad to call " my party."' This is non-partisanship. 

Will any one claim that the Christian work of the W. C. T. U. is 
less effective because it is non-sectarian, or that Miss Willard and I 
are not loyal Methodists because we do not seek to influence the de- 
nominational preferences of the women who join with us in Union work ? 

The Woman's Christian Temperanee Union is a grand Christian 
organization. Its origin was inspirational, its growth has been glor- 
ious.. God has honored it by permitting it to be His minister of 
blessing to multitudes of His "little ones." 



44 

It has been the medium through which the holiest instincts of 
womanhood have found forceful operation. It was designed to be an 
instrumentality in which all Christian temperance women might com- 
bine for mutual defence against the worst foe of the home. 

Its usefulness is impaired, its work impeded, and its ministrations 
limited by the entanglements of party alliance. This is the opinion of 
multitudes of the best men and women of the country. Clergymen 
crowned with years of honorable ministration at the altars of the 
Church ; strong men in reform, in philanthropy, and in gospel politics, 
these all, — with solemn earnestness disclaim against it. The denomi- 
national journals of the country set forth the unwisdom of this action. 
No other temperance organization ever had the presumption to 
attempt such unwarranted misuse of majority power. 

The late John B. Finch, the greatest debator on temper 
ance platform has ever known, and the acknowledged leader of "third 
party " politics, stated that it was most unwise for the Society, but 
sent a telegram of congratulation to Miss Willard on the adoption of 
the partisan resolution at St. Louis; he said to a friend, "it would 
help the party." 

Mr. Finch was caustic and mighty in speech and an intense 
believer in party politics as an agency of temperance reform. He 
gave his first allegiance to that grand organization, the Independent 
Order of Good Templars. He declared strongly that that society should 
never be entangled with partisanship. 

The National Temperance Society, long presided over by the 
great temperance advocate and Christian philanthropist, William E. 
Dodge, has put itself on record as opposed to society alliance with 
any political party. 

Its present President, that pioneer in temperance literatnre and 
temperance preaching, and pure social living, Dr. Theodore Cuyler, — 
he mourns this political departure. John N. Stearns, who has built 
up the mightiest arsenal of temperance warfare in the whole country, 
the National Temperance Society and Publication House, wholly dis- 
approves it. Aaron Powell, a very seer in philanthropic effort, and a 
great knight in Christian chivalry, he declares it to be contrary to the 
ethics of organized effort. Will any one dare to say of these that 
their intelligence is weak or their motives impure ? 

Hundreds of others, men and women as noble as they, are of the 
same mind. The women of our organization who are of this opinion 
are not represented in our national councils, but they quietly 
grieve or are openly indignant; a few speak out and then are 
subjected to the criticism of the Monthly Reading or the continued 
censure and assumed dictatorship of the National Society and its pol- 
itical allies. 



45 

It is because I believe this, and because I have loved the 
Woman's Christian Temperance Union since its organization, that I 
will not cease to cry aloud and spare not, if perchance the masses of 
our women may see the error and speak the protest which Js in their 
hearts, and thus the society be saved to its original purpose, and fill 
out years of honorable work for the God we serve in the land we love. 

Sixth. Miss Willard says in the Monthly Reading under review, 
* • I suppose there is hardly a local union in the United States where 
the question of the Union's political status has come up at all." 
Words fail us to express our utter astonishment at this statement. If 
this be true, upon what knowledge does Miss Willard base her state- 
ment that the W. C. T. U. is ''practically solid for the "third 
party ? ' ' Why does she speak of the Iowa women as but "a rem- 
nant," and that every Northern State, except Iowa and somewhat 
more than half of Pennsylvania, and every Southern State, in fact if 
not in form, have declared for the Prohibition party ? 

If the question has not been discussed in the local unions how can 
she be justified in declaring that " party politics is the chief weapon 
of our warfare." 

In Miss Willard's "Bugle Blast," of Nov. 29, 1888, the General 
Officers say, ' • The general declaration of the National or a State or 
County Convention is a wiser method than to urge a definite position 
in every local union. No National Officer has ever advised this and 
we are confident that our State presidents will follow in this matter 
the example and advice of their General Officers." 

To this, self-respecting W. C. T. U. women reply, "What right 
have National and State and County Unions to take positions which 
it is not wise for local unions to discuss ? Are not State and County 
Conventions representative bodies ? How can they, how dare they 
take representative action without knowing the wishes of their con- 
stituents ? " If they vote merely their ' * individual convictions " *then 
the W. C. T. U. is not " solid for the Prohibition party." If they 
pretend to represent the home women of the local unions they must 
find out through discussion what these women believe and what 
il definite position " they as Unions wish to take. 

Methodist women will remember that the question of their right 
to membership in the General Conference is soon to be presented to 
the votes of the local churches. Presbyterians also know with what 
care the Church guards the representation of the intelligence and con- 
science of the local membership, and yet, the National Officers ear- 
nestly urge ' ' that the question of party politics, which Miss Willard 
says is a ' vital issue ' — the ' chief weapon of our warfare, ' shall not 
be discussed." 



46 

Miss Willard has gone from State Convention to State Conven- 
tion urging the adoption of resolutions of party alliance, she has in 
some instances written them with her own hand and presented them 
to Committees on Resolutions and urged their passage. 

We are unable to reconcile the statement that the National 
Union has never urged upon any State or local union any action rela- 
tive to its relation to politics with these facts and others which hun- 
dreds of women know to exist. 

At the New York Convention she reported that she had asked 
Chairman Dickie, of the Third Party National Committee, what the 
women could do to help that party in the last campaign. Those who 
do not declare allegiance to that party are called ••obstructionists" 
and compared to a u refractory child." 

Money has been appropriated from local treasuries to circulate 
party campaign literature, and all this when •• hardly a local union 
in the United States has discussed the question of party alliance ! " i 
restrain personal comment upon the relation of these statement-. 
Each woman must come to her own conclusion. 

Seventh. The church illustration is no parallel : the Church does 
not bind its members to any party in the manner in which the admin- 
istration of the Woman's Christian Temperance Union attempts to 
bind its membership to the " third party. ' 

A majority of the bishops and General Conference appointees 
(leaders) of the Methodist Church, from which denomination the illus- 
tration is drawn, are Republicans: a minority as highly honored are 
not, but neither majority or minority among these consecrated men 
attempts a moral coercion of differing brethren, such as is attempted 
in the W. C. T. U. 

The bishops who voted the u third party" ticket are untainted 
by such intolerance and receive the universal respect of the whole 
Church. 

Eighth. The denial that money is diverted to party work is an 
evasion of the force of conditions which are known to exist. 

These conditions are, The General Officers of the National Union 
give time, service, and moral and political influence in their official 
capacity to one political party, and vigorous opposition to other par- 
ties ; the machinery of the National Union is used by their consent 
and co-operation to carry on the campaigns of that party and to 
accomplish its further party ends ; these General Officers are fully 
salaried from the dues of the women in the local unions ; their money, 
— the salaries of the officers, — belongs to themselves, but their time 
belongs to the work of the Union. These contributions are also very 
properly appropriated to the general work of the Society, and party 



work was not contemplated in the original financial plan. Such a 
diversion of funds we protest against. 

Again I repeat. ••Hundreds of dollars are continually coming 
into the National treasury from women who indignantly repudiate the 
party uses to which it is applied." The above statement is true. 

Ninth. Did* the " National Union commit a crime" in making 
the part}* alliance ? Only in so far as it foresaw the evil consequences 
which would follow, or seeing these consequences it refuses to retrace 
its steps and free itself from further complications of its temperance 
work. 

I believe large numbers of women are possessed by the purest 
motives, the most exalted spirit of self-abnegation in their adherence 
to the " third party " and to W. C. T. IT. alliance with it ; I believe a 
larger number of women are possessed of the same spirit and the same 
devotion to other parties : I do not impugn the motives of a single 
white ribboner in our whole country. I have never done so, but I do 
protest against methods which injure our work and are unjust in their 
practical operations. 

It is no defence to say "that whenever the Republican or any 
other party would declare for prohibition nationally, our National 
Woman's Christian Temperance Union would declare in favor of that 
party." 

It would be just as wrong for the N. W; C. T. IT. to declare for 
the Republican party if it had put the whole prohibition creed into 
its platform, as it was to pledge allegiance to the " third party." It 
is the principle of party alliance which is wrong, and would be 
equally wrong no matter what party was chosen. It is significant, 
however, in this connection, that the W. C. T. Unions of Maine 
and Kansas openly oppose the Republican party, which in those 
States is the open champion of prohibition ; partisan unions in many 
places openly oppose life-long temperance men, for the fault only that 
they are Republicans ; W. C. T. U. women have by this means aided 
in the election of liquor sympathizers who have voted against the 
very measures for which these women petitioned. 

It would be a noble act for the National Woman's Christian Tem- 
perance Union to announce its sympathy with all men in all parties 
who by their votes declare that the protection of the home is the first 
concern of all good government. This is quite a different thing from 
pledging the influence of the society to a political party, with all the 
complications therein involved. 

The difference is emphasized when the party espoused deliber- 
ately plans campaigns to defeat good men who declare, and for years 
have declared unceasing war on the liquor traffic; this the 



48 

so-called Prohibition party does, with Miss Willard's approval and 
co-operation. 

A shocking and painful illustration of partisanship was witnessed 
in Iowa a few weeks ago — the date of this writing is August 1889. 

Mrs. Clara Hoffmann. President of the Missouri W. C. T. V.. 
in a recent address delivered at Cedar Rapids, Iowa, said, " You 
may put me on record as saying that under no possible circumstances 
would I favor co-operation with the Republicans for the election of 
any Republican to office, or the furtherance of any Republican meas- 
ure." And this was in prohibition Iowa, where the Republican party 
is the avowed champion of the home against the saloon. Lest this 
strange statement of Mrs. Hoffman may so amaze those who read it. 
that they doubt its genuiness, the conversation which brought it out 
is given : 

After the lecture Hon. B. F. Wright, President of the State Temperance Alli- 
ance, was presented to Mrs. Hoffman and in the course of a spirited conversation 
put that lady a suppositious case to test the intensity of her opposition to the 
Republican party. Said he in substance : " Suppose the Republican party in my 
county should nominate me for representative and there was a clear majority of 
two hundred in my favor. Now with a twenty-year's record of uncompromising 
hostility to the saloon as a guarantee that I would take strong ground against any 
undoing of temperanco work done, would you counsel the Prohibitionists of my 
county to bring out a third candidate, even though you knew such a course would 
inevitably elect an anti-Prohibition, High License Democrat? " 

Mrs. Hoffman unhesitatingly replied, "You may put me on record as saying 
that under no possible circumstances would I favor co-operation with the Repub- 
licans for the election of any Republican to office, or the furtherance of a 
Republican measure." 

The President of the Temperance Alliance was completely overwhelmned 
with the intensity of the hostility of the Missouri W. C. T. U. president to the 
party that has given Iowa that which the third party Prohibitionists in other States 
have failed to secure. 

In this connection it would be pertinent to remember that the 
Executive Committee of the National Women's Christian Union, at the 
New York Convention, through a sub-committee, of which Miss 
Willard was chairman, declared Iowa to be in the ,; dry dock of 
Republicanism.'' Is there any ' mobility"- in 'such a reckless use of 
words ? 

Iowa women sat in that same convention and heard these and 
other comments on the political faith of their husbands, brothers, 
sons. These men had • "taken joyfully the spoiling of their goods, " had 
seen the flames devour their dwellings, were in danger of their 
lives — some of them are still — because they fought boldly and politically 
the wild beasts of the liquor traffic: and because Iowa women do not 
lift their voices in approval, or sit in dumb submission, but do 
continually make their indignant protest, they are called 



49 

1 'obstructionists" and toleration of their presence is "borne" with, as 
that of a refractory child." Could words express more arrogant 
assumption ! — or is it only recklessness ? 

Tenth. I am amazed that Miss Willard puts in the mouth of 
"Mrs. I." in the^ reading, such a reference to the interference of 
"men." Jt is a sad thing for woman's temperance work when its 
leaders repudiate the advice of men who are their peers in knowledge, 
in service to the cause of temperance and in devotion to righteousness 
in government. Large numbers of such men, with respectful 
appreciation of woman's work in the church and in reform, advise 
against party alliance. To complain of such advice, comes with little 
grace from the daughters of the church, and its long-time beneficiaries. 

Eleventh. I cannot understand Miss Willard' s statement that 
the Prohibition party leaders have never asked the W. C. T. U. to 
stand by them. Why do they put W. C. T. U. women on party 
committees, and ask the W. C. T. TJ. to circulate their literature j and 
why did they, in their last campaign, through their Chairman, Mr. 
Dickie, issue a circular asking each member of Local Unions to send 
ten cents to carry on the local campaign ? Why was Miss Willard 
lately elected a consulting member of the National Third Party 
Committee ? Why does she say "the W. C. T. TJ. and the Prohibition 
party will stand together?" 

The Chester County Union (Pa. ) needs no defense from any one. 
Its membership is of women noble and true; they are the peers in 
intelligence and Christian Temperance work, of any company of 
women anywhere. Their W. C. T. U. crime is, that they have 
exercised the liberty of individual conviction and independent action. 

Twelfth. Reference is made to the "loyalty test" based on 
political liberty — which was not adopted at the late convention. 

This is a half-truth. The truth withheld would change materially 
the impression conveyed by what is told. 

The Loyalty Test Resolution: — 

Resolved, That it is the sense of the National Woman's Christian Union that 
no member should speak from the public platform to antagonize our policy 
towards the party to which our influence is pledged, and that any member thus, 
antagonizing our party is hereby declared disloyal. 

Though reported by the Resolutions Committee it was net 
presented to the Convention. It was suppressed in a very questionable 
manner. Did Miss Willard fear it would carry, and that the censure 
of the public would be more than the Union and its political allies 
could wisely bear in a Presidential year ? The sub-committee of the 
Executive Committee in their reply to the memorial from Illinois say 



50 

it woucd not be wise to-day to make the test. My personal opinion is 
that it would have carried. 

A resolution embodying the same test was carried in the Executive 
Committee and also by the Convention. 

Miss West, editor of the Union Signal had asked the Executive 
Committee and the Convention to take action on her official relation 
to that paper. Though not elected by the Convention but by the 
Board of Directors of the W. T. P. A., she desired the moral support 
of the Convention. 

She had made editorial comment on Mrs. Foster's address to the 
Committee on Platform of the late National Republican Convention 
and said ''nothing more is needed to show that in spirit if not in name 
she has ceased to be a W. C. T. U. woman." Editorially she had also 
said that '"loyalty to the National Union did not permit adverse 
criticisms of the plans of the National Union, even when unadvisable 
for a Union to assume." 

Miss West very properly desired to know whether or not the 
Convention supported her editorial course. The Executive Committee 
sustained her position by a resolution and the Convention also adopted 
the following : — 

Resolved, That we extend to Mary Allen West, the able editor of the Union 
Signal, our hearty thanks for the manner in which she has conducted our 
National organ, and that we hereby endorse the position she has taken in the 
exercise of editorial prerogatives, on the political as well as any other questions 
which concern our organization; and in testimony of this, we express our 
appreciation of her labors, and our determination to stand by her in her difficult 
and trying position. 

And yet Miss Willard says the "loyalty test" resolution from the 
Illinois convention was not adopted or even considered. Miss Willard 
is technically correct, but has wholly failed to represent the sentiment 
of the Convention on the "loyalty test." 

If she were a bungler with words, or feeble of utterance, such 
failure would be more easily understood. The Illinois women — Miss 
Willard's own State — adopted a memorial involving the same test, and 
the Illinois President, Mrs. Rounds, has now before the National body 
an amendment making the same test. That proposed amendment is 
the logical sequence of the position which the National Union has for 
five years taken. We quote from the Illinois memorial: 

We further agree that the pledge you gave the Prohibition party — that being 
the only party that gave us any embodiment of prohibition principles — by such 
an overwhelming majority, gave to you, as a logical sequence, a political policy 
which no member of your honorable body has a right to antagonize. If the 
individual States are members of this great National Union, and if you depend 
upon these States to carry out your plans and policy, then the policy and plans of 
the National W. C. T. U. must be the policy and plans of the several States, else 



51 

we lack harmonious action, and to that extent fail to accomplish the purposes of 
our grand organization. We further believe that the basic principle of the 
Woman's Christian Temperance Union is, first, loyalty to its principles, and 
secondly, unity as far as possible in the carrying out of these principles. 

We would, therefore, abridge no woman's right to individual opinions, or the 
private utterance of the same ; but we protest against members of our organization 
being permitted, unchallenged, to antagonize your, and therefore our, policy on 
the public platform, thereby bringingcontempt upon your authority, and breeding 
discontenfwithin our ranks. 

Thirteenth. Miss Willard states that the Iowa W. C. T. U. is 
really a "Republican Society." The statement is not true, and Miss 
Willard's position as the elected head of an organization of Christian 
women cannot shield her from the consequence of such a statement. 

She repudiates any criticism of political dominance in the National 
Woman's Christian Temperance Union, notwithstanding its many 
utterances and closely interwoven lines of co-operation, and yet 
declares that the Iowa W. C. T. U. is a "Republican Society," when 
not one of these lines of co-operation exists. 

She makes a gentle assumption of generous toleration, in not 
interfering with the Iowa Union, notwithstanding it is a ' 'Republican 
Society." Yet she brings all the moral influence and every constitu- 
tional prerogative, and some very questionable means to bear on the 
State Society. She continually asserts that we of Iowa are free, but 
our exercise of liberty is characterized "obstruction," and when Iowa 
announced its freedom by a constitutional amendment, she declared 
that it thus "coerced the minority" in its midst. 

If it is coercion to declare that we will not endorse any party, 
what term can properly be applied to an actio* which delivers the 
Society "in its entirety" to a party which many members repudiate. 

She has gone to the limit of her constitutional powers and has 
abused parliamentary rules in her treatment of the Iowa Union and 
Iowa delegates in the National Convention ; and then declares that 
Iowa has been borne with as a "refractory child." 

She repeatedly declares that she intends to be fair and just, to 
protect the minority, etc. , but the record of her procedure as presiding 
officer does not maintain her claim. 

She allowed, without a word of objection, the previous question 
to be called while Mrs. Foster had the floor and was speaking, and 
she put the question on the adoption of the reply to the Iowa 
memorials without giving opportunity for one word of discussion; 
a delegate from Iowa had the floor and claimed the attention of the 
Chair, in vain. 

The Reading closes with the serene announcement "we now 
understand the situation and can go on the even tenor of our way not 



52 

agitating those questions further, but being ready to answer those of 
the contrary part, keeping always among us ; the bond of peace,' etc." 
To women who really desire the enactment and enforcement of 
temperance laws more than they desire the building up of any party, 
there can be no quiet acceptance of methods which they believe are 
contrary to the very end sought, and an assault upon the * "bond, of 
peace" which did once hold all our women in blessed comradeship in 
the warfare of the Home against the Saloon. Such women will not be 
at ease in Zion until their warfare is accomplished. 



53 



THE GENESIS OF PRQHIBITION PARTY WORK IN THE 

W. C. T. V. 

BY MRS. MARY J. ALDRICH, TOWA. 

The cl Facts in the Case " has been received, read and pondered; 
and it seems to be the plea of a pettyfogger before the jury of public 
•opinion, in behalf of a party against whom serious charges of unjust 
dealing, and unrighteous assumption of power have been preferred. 

It furnishes an illustration of a possible statement of facts so as 
to falsify them, by reason of the truth untold, concerning correlate 
facts. 

If the facts stated and the truth revealed, can be supplimented 
with facts untold and truths concealed, many erroneous impressions 
will be removed, and much unsound conclusion will be corrected. 

On page 30 of the "Facts in the Case" we are told that the 
Genesis of this party work was in the Louisville Convention ; ' in the 
report of the Committee on Resolutions." The real " Genesis " of this 
party work antedated this Louisville Convention and is to be found in 
the conversion of the President of the National Union to ' ■ third party " 
work, combined with her hope and belief that if this prohibition party 
which was "despised for the single reason that it lacks majority" 
could be "helped onward to success by woman" it would when in 
power place in her "weaponless" hands the "ballot as a home 
protection weapon." 

This desire of hers for the espousal of this party by the N. W. C. 
T. TJ. was first publicly expressed in her annual address at Washington 
it was reiterated at Louisville, planned for at Detroit and consummated 
at St. Louis. 

In evidence see Reports of the above named Conventions, the 
records of the Post Executive Committee meeting at Detroit and the 
history of the Mammoth Petition. 

The records of the Lake Bluff Convocation over which Miss 
Willard presided for years would also be germane to the subject under 
consideration. 

In her own account of a " Woman in Politics " she has herself told 
us of her sleepless nights at Saratoga in 1881, when she "thought 
through to the conclusion — her personal duty to take sides with the 
Prohibition Party", and of the share she had in the founding of the 
Home Protection Party; — the work of which, Prohibition Party leaders 
gratefully acknowledge as an important factor in bringing to their 



54 

party the unprecedented gains of 1885 — (see Prohibition Party Hand 
Book, 1884-85.) 

She has also told us that in the preparation of her annual address 
at Washington in 1881 — this thought came to her — "For you to favor 
the Prohibition Party as an individual is one thing, and to ask the 
Woman's Christian Temperance Union in your * official address to 
indorse that party, is quite another, are you going to do it ? " — of her 
thought " Such action will cost you much good-will and many votes" 
of the voice from loftier regions which said "You ought to declare for 
the party officially as well as individually. " 

Had President Willard at that time clearly comprehended that 
the decision of taking sides for or against prohibition party work, was 
one that in each case, should be an individual decision, and that those 
who thought out the question of their own personal duty to the- 
opposite conclusion of not taking sides with the Prohibition Party,. 
not only had an absolute right to follow out their own convictions,, 
but that it would be their duty to do so ; she might have seen that the 
official request for the N. W. C. T. U. involved more than the question 
of the ' ' cost to her of much good will and many votes. " 

Had she thought then of the rights of others she might have 
hesitated before she asked the majority to mortgage the influence of 
any one individual to the Prohibition Party— she would not consciously 
have asked the majority to misuse their power and pledge to the 
Prohibition Party that which they had no right to give to any party. 

But she didn't — and it is evident from her own words elsewhere 
that she failed to think of another thing, viz. — that while it was right 
for her as an individual, to pledge her support to a party candidate if 
she chose — it was not right for her as an official to pledge the support 
of her constituents to the candidate of any party. 

In "Glimpses of Fifty Years" on page 371 she writes — "The 
Woman's Christian Temperance Union of the North — it was then 
practically non-existent at the South — had stood solidly for the- 
Republican candidate, whom we then believed to be a friend to total 
abstinence and prohibition * * * being personally acquainted with 
him, I had written him at Mentor immediately after his nomination, 
that if he would hold to total abstinence during the campaign he* 
might count on our support — although Neal Dow was in the field and 
I had been invited, but declined, to go to the Prohibition Convention 
at Cleveland. For I had not then beheld, therefore was not disobedient 
to. the heavenly vision of political as well as legal suasion for the 
liquor traffic." 

In this paragraph, party prohibition work is evidently intended 
by the phrase "political" and prohibition, by the phrase "legal 
suasion;" and in the writer's thought party prohibition work is. 



55 

contrasted with work for prohibition principles, without reference to 
any party. 

Prohibition is really "legal suasion " and consequently " political" 
whether it be partial or entire prohibition, or whether obtained by 
partisan or non-partisan measures. There is the same failure in 
analysis manifested in the statement that the W. C. T. U. had "stood 
solidly for the Republican candidate " causing an unintentional 
mis-statement. 

The Union had never as an organization pronounced in favor of, 
or worked for Garfield or any one else as a Republican candidate. 

Even "the cheering of his name in the Boston Convention," 
which is mentioned, was not a party demonstration by the Union — 
it was because the individual members there, believed him to be a 
friend of total abstinence and prohibition — not simply because he was 
a Republican. Undoubtedly the large majority of those present were 
Republicans in their party preference, as was Miss Willard, but it was 
not as Republicans that they cheered a Republican candidate, it was 
as prohibition women of all parties they rejoiced over a Presidential 
candidate with temperance principles. The analysis is incorrect and 
the terms confusing. 

The paragraph also shows that the distinction between the 
political privilege, duty and action of the individual, and that of the 
National Union, or of the "official representing that Union — the 
freedom of the one and the limitations of the other, were not clearly 
apprehended — or President Willard would not have pledged the 
support of the National Union to Garfield, on the condition of his 
adherence to total abstinence. 

The object of the organization she officially represented was the 
prohibition of the Liquor Traffic as well as the promotion of Total 
Abstinence, and in the ranks of the Union were Democratic and 
Greenback women who had never authorized the official head of the 
Union to transfer their allegiance to the nominee of the Republican 
party. From her own account one might infer that had the conversion 
■of President Willard taken place before the Cleveland Convention, 
she might have felt it to be her official privilege and duty to pledge 
the support of the National Union to Neal Dow instead of 
Garfield, without so much as asking the consent of the Union — that 
she must adopt the new political faith and that as President of the 
National Union she must lead the organization to adopt it, — was the 
real ' : Genesis" of the party W. C. T. U. movement. 

The result has not fulfilled her prophesies, but the evils resulting 
from it have more than realized the fears of those who opposed it, 

And she tells us that ' ' after prayer, without one misgiving" she 
wrote her reasons for such party endorsement by the organization, 



56 

closing with this plea — " Here then at the Nation's capital let us 
declare our allegiance, here let us turn our faces toward the beckoning 
future, here where the liquor traffic pours in each year its revenue of 
gold, stained with the blood of our dearest and best, let us set up our 
Home Protection standard in the name of the Lord," 

The request fell on unheeding ears. The Convention did not make 
the declaration so earnestly desired. Neither was it willing to do so- 
at Louisville, when President Willard, after reciting the history of the 
Home Protection Party during the year — its fusion with the old Prohi- 
bition Party under the name of the Prohibition Home Protection Party 
and distinctly avowing the fact that we were ' ( a non-partisan society 
working through moral suasion" she " renewed the political attack," 
as she herself expressed it and asked for a " sympathetic declaration 
in favor of this independent party movement." Of this Miss Willard 
has recently written — ' ' I saw the Convention was reluctant to make 
this new departure. Profoundly convinced that it ought to do so, I 
sought my friend Mrs. L. D. Carhart, then President of the Iowa W. 
C. T. U. and asked her to write a resolution bearing on the subject." 

Then quoting the famous Louisville resolution as it was adopted — 
she writes — "Nothing is truer than that most people are more afraid 
of words than of ideas, and as this resolution avoided naming any 
party, while really pointing out one by its description, the Convention 
passed it with very little difficulty." 

How any one who knows and admits these facts in the case, can 
consider that this Louisville resolution was the "Genesis" of the 
party W. C. T. U. work passes comprehension. 

How they can claim it when they know that the endorsement of 
the Prohibition Party by the National Union, was contrary to the 
thought of those who wrote the resolution and that those who voted for 
its adoption were opposed to such endorsement, by the Union of that 
or any other party, is a mystery. It has been made the foundation 
of that work, but it was not the ' l Genesis" of it. 

It was the conversion of Miss Willard to the ' l . third party" 
movement, her hope, desire, belief, that if the W. C. T. U. helped the 
Prohibition Party into power, that the party, when in power would 
give the ballot to the women who helped them, that was the real 
"Genesis" of party work in the N. W. C. T. U. as a careful reading 
of her addresses at Washington and Louisville Convention will show. 

The Louisville resolution was the Exodus of the desire, the- 
purpose, the plan, of the official head of the National Union — to secure 
the endorsement of the Prohibition party by that Union, an endorse- 
ment which she believed would make friends for the party everywhere 
until it become "regnant and the two reign side by side." It was 
the first step in the Exodus from the unity, harmony and strength of a 



5T 

non-partisan organization working through moral suasion, — out into 
the wilderness of party differences, dissensions and controversies which 
now agitate this same National Union that has been declared to be 
almost solidly partisan ; — the first step in that new departure which 
must if adhered to, eventually subject all the "grand educational 
work'' ofits multiplied departments to the antagonisms and limitations 
of a partisan allegiance — and this tirst step was taken as we have seen, 
when the ideas were so obscured by the words of the resolution, that 
the one whose desire had obtained it and who clcarlv saw what the 
adoption of the resolution would do, was herself surprised at the 
practical unanimity with which it was adopted — with such a^beginning, 
what will the end of the wilderness journey be! 



Db 



THE NON-PARTISAN MINORITY EN THE NATIONAL 
WOMAN'S CHRISTIAN TEMPKRENCE UNION. 

MRS. J. ELLEN POSTER, IOWA. 

The first official act of protest on the part of the minority wa> the 
resignation of Mrs. Foster from official relation to the National Union. 
She had been for years the Superintendent of the Department ofL _ - 
lation. and received full measure of respect and confidence. When 
the party policy was adopted, she could not conscientiously conduc* 
legislative work of the National Society along that line, and she felt it 
would be dishonorable to retain official relation to a policy which 
did not approve. 

Therefore she resigned a position to which she had just been re- 
elected. She did this with great reluctance, for she loved the women 
and loved the work, but there was no other honorable course open 
to her. 

She was at the next annual meeting in her own State el< 
President of the Iowa Union, which brought her again into the 
National Convention as Vice-President for Iowa. Her position in the 
National Union being ex-officio, she still retains this relation. The 
by-law which declares * -States and individuals free" gives her and her 
State, nominal acceptance in the Woman's Christian Temperance Union 
household — an acceptance which continued acts of discourtesy, and 
parliamentary and other injustice, make a mocking pretense. 

In October. 1885, at the Philadelphia Convention, the first formal 
protest was offered after the adoption of the 

PARTISAN" RESOLUTION*. 

••We refer to the his ars of persistent moral suasion work as 

fully establishing our claim to be called a non-political society, but one which 
steadily follows the white banner of Prohibition wherever it may be displayed. 
We have, however, as individuals, always allied ourselves in local and State 
political contests with those voters whose efforts and ballots have been given to 
the removal of the dram-shops and its attendant evils, and at this time, while re- 
cognizing that our action as a National Society is not binding upc r in- 
dividuals, we re-affirm the position taken by the Society at Louisville in i882,and 
at Detroit in 1883, and at St Louis in 1884, and ratified by a large majority of the 
States and Territories in the Annual Conventions of 1885. pledging our influence 
to that party, by whatever name called, which shail furnish us the best embodi- 
ment of prohibition principles, and will most surely protect our homes. And as 

»w know which National party gives us the desired embodiment of the 
principles for which our ten years" labor has been expended, we will continue to 



59 

lend our influence to the National political organization which declares in its plat- 
iorm for National Prohibition and Home Protection. In this, as in all progressive 
.effort, we will endeavor to meet argument with argument, misjudgment with pa- 
tience, denunciation with kindness, and all our dangers and difficulties with 
prayer." 

Upon the adoption of this resolution, by a vote of 245 to 30, Mrs. J. 
Ellen Foster, of Iowa, presented a protest bearing twenty-six signa- 
tures. Mrs. Mary A. Woodbridge, of Ohio; Mrs. Mary T. Lathrop, 
of Michigan, and Mrs. Clara A. Hoffman, of Missouri, were appointed 
a committee to prepare an answer. 

PROTEST. 

With a deep sense of the grave responsibility resting upon us at this hour, 
and with a conviction of duty so overmastering that it will not permit us to be 
silent, we solemnly, and in the presence of Him whose name we bear, protesi 
against the action of this Convention in committing this Christian organization to 
ihe aid and support of a political party. 

I. This action is wrong in principle. A moral reform association, having as 
its test of membership a total abstinence pledge, ought not to ally itself with any 
organization, political or otherwise, having no such test of membership. 

II. It is a specific abandonment of that spirit of toleration and of Christian 
•courtesy which has permitted harmony of action with a wide diversity of opinion. 
It establishes a new test of allegiance, and is a practical refusal on the part of 
the majority, in the interests of a political party, to recognize that equality of 
rights which is the sure basis of permanent organized effort. 

III. In contravention of this equality of rights, while professing to leave in- 
dividuals and States free, it uses the collective influence of the Union, and its 
moral power, as an entirety, including that of the opponents of this policy, in the 
upbuilding and advancement of a political party to which some of our members, 
as individuals, refuse allegiance. It lends our influence and may appropriate 
our money to aid a political party over which we have no control. 

IV. It circumscribes the grand moral power of this great body of Christian 
women and wounds the confidence of the Christian public, subjecting our work 
to party limitations without conferring added political power. 

V. It transforms the broad political work of our organization for the triumph 
of Prohibition principles, and will unnecessarily hinder the speedy accomplishment 
•of our purpose. 

VI. It makes the official organ of our Union a partisan political sheet and 
tends to lower its high standard of Christian journalism to the level of partisan 
political controversy. 

VII. It is unjust. The partisan political policy of the National Union, so 
detrimental to Prohibition work in many States, has been made possible by the 
votes of representatives from States which will not carry out or tolerate that 
policy in their own States. 

VIII. A year of the dominance of this policy has brought confusion of 
thought concerning Prohibition as a principle and party Prohibition as a. policy. Its 
continuance tends to alienation and dissension among our members or the inevi- 
table disintegration of our Unions. 



60 

In view of these facts we cannot conscientiously keep silence ; but that we 
may, as far as possible, free ourselves from the responsibility of this action we 
enter this our most solemn protest against this action of the Convention in commit- 
ting this body and those we represent to the support of a political party. 
Here we stand ; 
We can do no other ; 
So help us God. Amen. 

J. Ellen Foster, 

and twenty-five others. 

The protest offered by the non-partisans at the Minneapolis Con- 
vention, 1886, was substantially the same as that of the year previous 
at Philadelphia, given above. 

The Nashville protest is here given : 

"Recognizing and respecting fully the right of a majority in any philanthropic 
society to adopt rules and methods of action for the government and work of said 
organization, we nevertheless deny the right and most solemnly protest against 
any action of the majority which invades the rights of conscience, or encroaches 
upon the political liberty of any of its members ; by giving the aid and influence 
"in its entirety" to any ecclesiastical organization or political party. We assert 
the right of each member of any philanthropic society to their denominational 
and political preferences to be inalienable and beyond the just power of any ma- 
jority to transfer. The National Woman's Christian Temperance Union, in re- 
solving to " lend the influence *' of this organization to the party known as the 
Prohibition party, has repeatedly violated the right of its members to the abso- 
lute control of their political preferences and has formally refused to adopt a 
constitutional guaranty, by which even the weakest member shall have the pledge 
of the whole that their denominational and political preferences shall be sacredly 
and inviolably protected. True to the right, as I see the right, I hereby sign my 
name in protest against this unjust action, as a duty I owe to myself and this or- 
ganization also. 

Here I stand ; 

I can do no other ; 

So help me God. Amen." 

The Convention denied debate on this protest. The National 
Minutes of that year read — page 54 : "Mrs. Aldrich read a protest, 
of which notice had been given. Mrs. Hoffman moved that it be re- 
ceived without debate and spread upon the minutes, which wa3 
carried." 

At the New York Convention, 1888. the Iowa women made their 
protest in the form of a memorial from their State Convention to the 
National Convention. 

That it was to be presented was fully known to the General Officers 
and many in the Convention, because the Iowa Convention had been 
held some time previous, and its doings were of course published in 
the Iowa Messenger, the official organ of the society. 

Early in the first session a resolution was adopted that all me- 
morials and protests be referred to the Executive Committee without 



61 

reading. Upon this the previous question was moved while Mrs, 
Foster had the floor and was speaking. 

A call was made for the ayes and nays. It was not sustained be- 
cause the Committee on Credentials had not reported and it was im- 
possible to know who were the members of the Convention. 

Miss TVillard was in the chair and sustained the previous question, 
although Mrs. Burlingame, of Rhode Island, asked if it were "allow- 
able to make such a motion when a lady is on the floor and has been 
recognized by the Chair." 

Miss TVillard ruled that it was correct to call the previous ques- 
tion, even under these circumstances. 

Mrs. Benjamin, of Michigan, Superintendent of Parliamentary 
Usage, sustained the Chair in that ruling. 

Thus at the first session of the Convention an Auxiliary State 
Union — Iowa — which had sent a memorial in the most dignified and 
solemn manner known to the procedure of deliberative bodies, was 
denied the right to be heard ! Was ever such abuse of majority 
power attempted in any deliberative assemblage claiming to be 
Christian or representative ? 

A most honorable Christian gentleman, universally respected, said 
of this action : ' 'No self-respecting set of men would have sat under 
such ruling one hour. " 

In justice to Miss TVilliard, letters are here inserted which declare 
her intention to be just. 

TO MRS. FOSTER. 

Philadelphia, Oct 28. — (Sabbath p. m.)— My dear Judith : You are a lawyer 
and know that a wrong motive must be found for any discredited action before 
its perpetrator can be condemned. Now I do not think you can find one in the 
Convention or in its presiding officer — I mean an adequate motive for doing the 
smallest injustice to you or yours. 

We knew from the first that out of over four hundred delegates you had but 
a small minority — it proved to be about thirty strong. If we failed to do you 
justice under the rules of parliamentary usage ; if we failed, indeed, to treat you 
with the utmost fairness, such failure and injustice must at once rebound upon 
ourselves. We had nothing to fear, and every motive to favor, and I solemnly 
declare that I meant to act upon this basis from first to last, always and in every- 
thing. Of course I cannot speak with positiveness for every member of the 
Convention, but I can for the presiding officer. In every parliamentary ruling I 
acted up to my knowledge and light, as I did in everything said and done in that 
Convention, in my relations to the minority. If I failed, it is the testimony of 
many in the majority that I failed toward them. 

In taking the final vote at midnight, I felt and proposed no injustice toward 
Iowa. I thought the question generally called, and have no recollection that I 
proposed to "down" any person in that delegation from the beginning to the end. 
I did favor Mrs. Benjamin's objection to so much as considering the resolution 
about "loyalty," and am, of course, strongly blamed by many. 

Believe me, ever with an earnest purpose to do right, your friend and sister, 

Frances E. Willard. 



62 

P. S. — In referring the memorials to the Executive Committee, Iowa and Illi- 
nois, for the first time in years, voted together and both were, equally indignant. 
It was not a "partisan" motion, but was in the interest of keeping protests from 
both sides of the Convention until they could all be carefully considered. This 
may not have been wise, but it is certainly impartial. 

MRS. FOSTER'S REPLY. 

New York City, Nov. 16, '88. — My dear Miss Willard : Your letter of the 
28th reached me in due time. It did not require immediate reply and I have of 
late been more than usually burdened with work because of the serious illness of 
my most valued secretary. Please be assured that I gave the letter the most 
careful consideration. 

You seem to apprehend that my censure and the censure of the public upon 
1he general action and procedure — parliamentary and otherwise — of the late N. 
W. C. T. U. Convention relates to yourself personally, or to the Convention in 
its personnel ; with this I have nothing to do. Motive can attach only to per- 
sonality. 

I long ago determined to scrupulously obey in thought and word the Scripture 
command, "judge not." But if it were otherwise and the determination of the 
merits of the case turned upon the motive of the presiding officer, the fact that 
you possess the undisputed power of numbers, and an unquestioning personal 
following, does not acquit of unworthy motives. History records many instances 
of abuse of power of good people who "had nothing to fear." 

You begin your letter by an appeal to my knowledge of law, and solemnly 
declare that you intended to be fair and just in your official relations to the mi- 
nority. Permit me, as a lawyer, to say that in law a declaration of intention is 
not evidence of intention. Courts take cognizance of acts and from acts infer 
intentions. They consider the circumstances attending a case, the general intel- 
ligence of the person charged, his facilities of information as to the probable re- 
sults of his act ; from these sources are motives determinedj and the bearing of 
motives upon specific acts. 

Miss Willard is not on trial ; her personality is her own, and is always sa- 
credly guarded by me. The official acts of the president of the National W. C. 
T. U. are before the country ; they are proper subjects of discussion. I con- 
cur in the very general opinion that certain of those acts were contrary to correct 
parliamentary procedure, and that there were other violations of the ethics of 
Christian controversy which were quite as painful illustrations of the evil results 
of party alliance. 

I pray that the inconsistencies and disasters which have thickened and dark- 
ened the path of our noble organization since this heresy fastened upon it may 
drive its unselfish friends to guide the work away from these ever-increasing 
dangers. 

I will comply with your request and ask the publication of your letter in the 
Iowa Messenger; also this, my answer. 

With tender memories of the days of "Auld Lang Syne," yours sincerely, 

J. Ellen Foster. 






63 



W. C. T. U. -MEMORIALS AND ANSWERS. 

MRS. J. ELLEN FOSTER, IOWA. 

The Iowa Woman's Christian Temperance Union has continually 
made prQtest against the party alliance of the National Society. It 
was organized before the National and has had wide and deep experi- 
ence in the great controversy between the Home and the Saloon : Its 
members are veterans in the service and may be pardoned if with 
thankful hearts they boast of their well earned victories and show how 
fields were won; yet may they with humility answer those who 
question, — " verily it is not of ourselves we boast, but of our God who is 
a Man of War." 

With Iowa women the working out of non-partisan measures has 
been a demonstration of the wisdom of those methods ; the utter failure 
of partisan measures brings our success into bold relief. Knowing 
these things, temperance people in Iowa stoutly contend for what they 
have proved. 

This contention with the National Society was — for three years — 
by protest from individual delegates to the National Convention. The 
last year — 1888 — the State Society, in annual meeting at Des Moines 
adopted a Memorial to the National Convention. This was the most 
dignified and solemn manner of approach. 

The National convention early in its first session voted that Protests 
and Memorials should be referred to the Executive Committee without 
reading ; Thus summarily was the right of petition denied an auxiliary 
state. 

A memorial from the Illinois Annual meeting was read by Mrs. 
Rounds, President of the Illinois Union, to the Executive Committee. 
It was never presented in due form to the National Convention. 

These memorials and the answers to them from a sub-committee 
of the Executive Committee — Miss Willard, Mrs. Hoffman Mrs. 
Lathrop— are also given. Notice the short crisp answer to Iowa, 
the warm greeting to Illinois and see what it costs to stand for one's 
convictions in the N. W. C. T. U. 

MEMORIAL NO 1. 

The Fifteenth Annual Meeting of the Woman's Christian Temperance Union of Iowa, in 
session at Des Moines, Oct. 2-j, '88, to the Annual Meeting of the National Wom- 
an's Christian Temperance Union, to be held in New York City, Oct. 19-23, '88 — 
Greeting : 

With a solemn realization of the responsibility resting upon us as the only State 
Woman's Christian Temperance Union that stands protesting against the partisan 
position of the National Union ; with an irresistable sense of duty to ourselves in 



64 

our convictions of right, and our obligation to what we deem the best interests of 
the cause, as well as our duty to temperance workers in other States who are op- 
posed to the action of the National Union, and recognizing the confidence which 
the Christian public has reposed in us, we pray you to recede from the partisan 
political action taken in 1884 and re-affirmed each subsequent year. 

This alliance is wrong in principle, unchristian in method, and disastrous in 
results. 

"To thine own self, be true," is as vital to the integrity of an organization as to 
individual character. 

The basic principle of the Woman's Christian Temperance Union is Christian 
unity in promoting the principles and practice of total abstinence. The basic 
principle of party organization is citizen unity in political action. These differing 
principles are unequally yoked by the partisan affiliation of the National Union. 

It is as true in morals as in mathematics that quantities must be reduced to a 
common denominator before they can be added or subtracted. 

To attempt to reduce the Woman's Christian Temperance Union to the standard 
of partv action does violence to the equities which should control all organized 
effort. 

The partisan position of the National Union is a prostitution of its original pur- 
pose. It must be abandoned or the organization will cease to be an evangel. 

The influence of the National Union "in its entirety" is given to a political 
party — its money is applied, through the salaries of the National Officers, to the 
services of a political party. The moral influence of woman is the political power 
which stands to her in place of the ballot. This moral influence is pledged to a 
political party. This is political robbery and strikes at the foundation principles of 
political liberty. 

The spirit of liberty is further outraged by assaults upon the rights of free 
speech. This is attested by the action of the National Convention in 1886, in the 
adoption of the following By-law, Section II., Chapter VIII. By-laws of the 
National Union : 

"Any resolution referring to our attitude toward political parties shall be 
decided by vote without discussion." 

And further, by the passage of a resolution declaring that superintendents must 
not antagonize the policy of the National Union. Not only is free speech in 
National Convention suppressed by statutory law, but the right to the expression 
of individual opinion by National Superintendents is denied by resolution. 

This alliance with a political party also makes party fealty a test of loyal mem- 
bership in the organization. 

In proof of this we cite the utterances of the official organ of the National Union. 
In its issue of July 12, 1888, it says of a vice-president of the National Union : 

" Mrs. Foster appeared before the same Committee and was greeted with great 
applause. She rehearsed her deep affection for the Republican party, of which 
she announced herself a loyal daughter ; dwelt upon her services to it, and im- 
plored them to put a temperance plank in their platform. She pleaded eloquently 
and closed by declaring and repeating it three times over, that whether they put 
the plank in or not, indeed, no matter what they did, she should stick to the Re- 
publican party. Nothing more is needed to show that in spirit, if not in name, 
she has ceased to be a W. C. T. U. woman, than this declaration, that party is 
more to her than principle." 

This has since been repeated. It has not been repudiated by the National 
Officers. Thus is an officer in the National Union "read out', because she exer- 
cises her individual right to bestow her political preferences with the party of her 
choice. This partisan arrogance judges every Woman's Christian Temperance 



"Union woman as true or untrue to the principles of prohibition by her allegiance 
to a political party. An editorial in the Union Signal oi July 26, 1888, on "Auxil- 
iaryship and Loyalty," says : 

"Auxiliaryship is the letter, loyalty is the spirit, and the latter means a cordial 
co-operation in carrying out the plans of State or National so far as practicable, 
and certainly does not permit adverse criticism of them, even when unadvisable 
for a Union to assume." 

Thus disapproval of the plans and policies of the National Union is declared to 
be disloyalty. 

UNCHRISTIAN METHODS. 

In support of this attempted union of divergent agencies, facts have been mis- 
represented, motives have been impugned, character has been assailed, utter- 
ances private and public have been misconstrued, and our holy cause grievously 
wounded in the house of its friends. 

It is not strange that persons seek to avoid public censure by denial of these 
charges, but denial is not proof, and the facts remain unchanged. 

This violence to principle and these unchristian methods have wrought many 
disasters to our organization, to woman's work, and to the cause of temperance. 
The confusion in moral standards renders unity impossible; it lowers the moral 
tone of our organization, and threatens its very life. With hearts loyal to truth 
and to temperance, and grieved by the position we are compelled to take, we 
nave stated the truth as God gives us to see it. And we pray that by a speedy 
granting of our request, the rights of all may be assured, and this organization, 
which God has so signally honored, may be saved from a further compromise of 
the dignity of its Christian womanhpod. 

Adopted October 5, 1888. 

(Mrs.) J. Ellen Foster, President. 

(Mrs.) Mary J. Aldrich, Cor. Sec'y- 
REPLY 

TO THE MEMORIAL NO. 1, ADOPTED AT THE IOWA STATE MEETINO 

AT DES MOINES, OCTOBER, 1888. 

In all justice and fairness, the N. W. C. T. U. is constrained to deny the 
charges, accusations and insinuations of the above memorial, as having neither 
truth nor foundation. 

Year after year, on the floor of the Convention, have all points of difference 
been fully and freely discussed, and decided by ever increasing majorities. 

Our National organ, The Union Signal, has given more space, in proportion to 
numbers, to the minority than to the majority, and has shown a magnanimity 
without precedent in journalism; while the forbearance of the N. W. C. T. U. to 
the few that persistently obstruct the proceedings of the National meeting has no 
parallel in the history of representative bodies. 

Holding all power of decision and action by its increasing majorities, it has 
yet borne and forborne, as the mother with her refractory child; but it cannot 
and will not recede from the position it has conscientiously taken. 

[Signed] Sub -Committee of Executive Committee, 

Frances E. Willard, 
Mary L. Lathrop, 
Clara Hoffman. 



6G 



MEMORIAL NO. 2. 

The Fifteenth Annual Meeting of 'the Woman's Christian Temperance Union of Illinois, 
in session at Macomb, October 10-12. 1888, to the Annual Meeting of the National 
Woman's Christian Temperance Union, to be held in New York City, October /0-23, 
j 888. — Greeting. 

We call your honorable body to witness that we stand upon record as having 
been loyal in letter and in spirit to the plans and purposes of your organization. 
Whenever we have heard the call to advance we have moved to that command 
with unquestioning faith and unfaltering courage, because we believe that under 
God you are leading us to victory. 

Because of this faith in you, we give quick and hearty support to the pledge 
you made to that party, "by whatever name called, which would give us the best 
embodiment of prohibition principles, and would most surely protect the home ; " 
but we are grieved that you also declared and still affirm that this action on your 
part was not and is not binding upon States and individuals, thereby making our 
needed assistance in the fulfilment of your pledge, the ground of much adverse 
criticism by some members of the national organization and of the great White 
Ribbon Army. 

We further believe that the pledge you give the Prohibition party — that being 
the only party which gave us any embodiment of Prohibition principles — by such 
an overwhelming majority, gave to you, as a logical sequence, a political policy 
which no member of your honorable body has the right to antagonize. If the 
individual States are members of this great National Union, and if you depend 
upon these States to carry out your plans and policy, then the policy and plans of 
the National W. C. T. U. must be the plans of the several States, else we lack 
harmonious action, and to that extent fail to accomplish the purposes of our grand 
organization. We further believe that the basic principle of the Woman's Christ- 
ian Temperance Union is, first, loyalty to its principles, and secondly, unitv as far 
as possible in the carrying out of this principle. 

We would, therefore, abridge no woman's right to individual opinions, or the 
private utterances of the same, but Ave protest against members of our organization 
being permitted, unchallenged, to antagonize your, and therefore our, policy on 
the public platform, thereby bringing contempt upon your authority, and breed- 
ing discontent within our ranks. 

We come, now, asking you to define what is loyalty and what is disloyalty to 
your policy? Webster defines loyalty as being true to plighted faith, duty, or 
love. You stand before this nation with plighed faith to the Prohibition party. 

Did you consider it duty to thus stand, or was it the frivolous fancy of a passing 
hour that you incorporated in your pledge at St. Louis in 1884? 

Did you do this for love's sweet sake, glad to find a party which would protect 
the home, love"s dwelling-place, or was it the heartless promises of a coquette, 
false to God, to man, and to herself? 

Your petitioners, believing that you took that stand in all honesty of heart and 
purpose, now declare it to be their unanimous opinion, in convention assembled, 
without one dissenting vote, that you cannot honorably recede from that position 
of " pledged prayers, influence and co-operation " to the Prohibition party so long 
as it shall continue to give us the principles embodied in its Indianapolis platform, 
and we further believe it to be equally impossible for you to stand still while the 
pillar of cloud and of fire moves on ! Hoping to hear from this Convention the 



67 

order to advance, we pledge you the unwavering support of fourteen thousand 
"White Ribboners of Illinois, loyal subjects ready at once to move, in obedience 
to your command ! 

[Signed] Mrs. Louise S. Rounds, 

President Ilinois W. C. T. U. 
For the Convention. 

REPLY 

TO MEMORIAL NO. 2 FROM ILLINOIS. 

We accord a hearty recognition of the loyalty and strength with which the 
Illinois W. C. T. U. has stood in its place and carried out the plans and purposes 
of the National Union. 

We realize that the conditions and circumstances which called out this expres- 
sion have furnished strong' provocations, but we believe that the position taken 
by Illinois too advanced for our present safety and out of harmony with our past 
policy. 

Total abstinence was our first fundamental principle, and from it has grown the 
wide educational work of the departments. But even these when organized were 
never made obligatory, but the auxiliary States were left to their own choosing 
which of them all should be incorporated into the State plan of work. 

We believe it would not be 'wise to-day to make the loyalty, upon carrying 
out of all these lines without regard to circumstances or ability to make them 
succesful. 

Prohibition was equally fundamental from the first. Previous to 1884, we 
worked for any political party to achieve it ; these efforts revealed to us the utter 
hopelessness of seeking to carry the principle of Prohibition through parties 
pledged to the policy of license and to the liquor traffic itself. 

Our " political policy was not therefore determined by a pledge of fidelity to a 
party, but by unalterable devotion to the principle which is their foundation as well 
as our own. That we are with the Prohibitory party is not so much choice of 
comradeship as the destiny of righteousness. 

Again as in its educational work, the National Union left auxiliary States to 
come to expressed fealty to the St. Louis resolution, as they were given to see its 
wisdom, while personally in membership, and constitutionally in States, we have 
always been what we are to-day, Prohibitionists. We do not believe it would be 
wise to-day to cut off from auxiliaryship State Unions true to Prohibition, but as 
yet unwilling to pledge fealty to the party representing it. We can afford to wait 
for the swift-coming hour when there can be no longer non-partisan grounds on 
this great question. 

[Signed] Sub -Committee of Executive Committee, 

Frances E. Willard, 
Mary T. Lathrop, 
Clara Hoffman. 
REPLY. 

The National W. C. T. U. Convention, New York City, Oct. ig-23, 1888, to the W. 
C. T. U. minority of Iowa, as represented in Memorial Numbers ', 3, 4, J and 6. 

Beloved Sisters : We have long known that the leaders of Iowa W. C. T. U., 
while constantly protesting against majority rule in the National W. C. T. U., and 
branding it as "persecution," were rigorously suppressing the minority in their 
own State. We know that last year the Corresponding Secretary of your State 
society declared openly and repeatedly to different delegates that, by the help of 
Heaven, no third party woman should ever again come as a delegate from Iowa, 
and the present Convention, with a solid delegation of Republican women from 
that State, proves this to have been no empty threat. " That mercy I to others 



68 

show that mercy show to me.'' has not been the voice of Iowa W. C. T. U. to the 
National society, but while complaining bitterly of us, this auxiliary alone among 
the States has exhausted parliamentary possibilities in its determination to 
depress, suppress, and oppress its minority. 

We have lamented with you, and more deeply than you have been aware, the 
hardships you have suffered. 

But the National W. C. T. U. makes two constitutional requirements of its 
members — and two only — signing the pledge of total abstinence, and paying 
annual dues. 

It has always been with us a cardinal doctrine that each State should be left 
free in all things except these. When, after we had repeatedly declared in our 
national platform that we would lend our influence to the Prohibition parrs-, Iowa 
proceeded to so alter its constitution as to be non-partisan in name while so 
strongly Republican in fact, we made no objection to her decision. 

As your Memorial intimates, so we believe that it is a confession of weakness 
not to be willing to hear both sides, and that by the exclusion of the National W. 
C. T. U. literature, Iowa has narrowed its vision to its own small field and will be- 
come provincial if it maintains this attitude. 

We believe that Iowa coerced the convictions of her Prohibition party women 
when she made it unconstitutional to pass a resolution of sympathy with those 
brave men who in the midst of untold contradiction have raised their standard 
for National Prohibition. 

But as we have always maintained the freedom of each State in all particulars, 
save pledges and dues, and as your State has elected as its President a Republi- 
can party leader, we have not judged it just to ,J go behind the returns." We 
have no desire to dictate W. C. T. U. laws or policy in any State or Territory-. 
Under this tolerant method of procedure our auxiliaries have fallen into line, 
until throughout the nation; except in Iowa, and somewhat more than one half of 
Pennsylvania, the White Ribboners of this nation are practically solid for the 
Prohibition party, every Northern State save these have formally declared for it 
in the State Convention, and all the Southern States having done this in fact, if 
not in form. But ours is a society having forty distinct departments of work, and 
as we do not make our party preferences a shibboleth, thousands of earnest 
women join heartily with us, whose study of this question has not been profound 
enough to prove to them as ours has proved to us that party politics must be used 
as the mightiest weapon of our warfare against the liquor traffic. They are fast 
perceiving this, however, and we do not wish to make any political test of loyaltv 
to the National W. C. T. U. except the test of Personal Conviction. 

Therefore, beloved sisters, while we are unable to express to you the sorrow 
with which we note the temporary situation in your State, we do not believe it to 
be for the best interests of the great cause, dearer to you and us alike than any 
personal consideration can ever be, that we should interfere with the legislation 
of your State Union. 

Be of good cheer: the tide is rising; it will soon reach all nooks and corners; it 
will float the noble young ship Iowa, out of the dry-dock of Republicanism, upon 
the broad sea of National Prohibition. We will help you in all legitimate ways to 
hasten this deliverance. It is only a question of time, and that time will be brief. 
We applaud your heroism and patience. " Hold the fort for we are coming," and 
may God defend the right. [Signed] Frances E. Willard, 

Mary T. Lathrop, 
Clara Hoffman. 
Notwithstanding the adverse memorials from Iowa women, came 

before the Executive Committee in so irregular a manner they were 



! 



69 

received with the same — even greater — attention than was the one 
from the Iowa State Convention, which was the solemn action of a 
representative body and presented in due form and through proper 
channels to the National Convention to which it was addressed. The 
memorial from Illinois was of the same dignity in its source and man- 
ner of adoption by the Convention from whence it emanated, but was 
never formally presented to the National Convention, and was not 
therefore ever regularly before that body. 

Attention is called to the following statements among many irre- 
conciliable ones in this gratuitous and unparliamentary assault upon 
the W. C. T. U. of Iowa. 

1. It is stated that the Iowa Union in non-partisan in name, but 
Republican in fact. 

Does the National Union charge the Iowa Union with duplicity 
and deceit ? If not, then what idea are the words intended to convey ? 

2. If ' 'it is a confession of weakness not to be willing to hear 
both sides," why do the General Officers advise the Unions — outside 
of Iowa — not to discuss the question. 

If as Miss Willard supposes ' 'there is hardly a local Union in the 
United States where the question of the Unions' political status has 
come up at all," why is it declared that "Iowa has narrowed its vision 
to its own small field and will become provincial if it maintains this 
attitude ? 

3. If "profound study" is needed to prove to all W. C. T. U. 
women that ' 'party politics must be used as the mightiest weapon of 
warfare against the liquor traffic," why do the General Officers advise 
against such a study ? It is of course easier to lead a company of 
women who do not study profoundly, but does not the solemn work we 
have in hand demand that we use the very best weapons ? 

4. It is asserted "we do not believe it best to interfere with the 
legislation of your (Iowa) State Union." What interference covld 
the National give with the Iowa State Union ? What jurisdiction has 
it beyond the requirement of dues and pledge keeping ? The implied 
assumption of rights to do something which great tolerance desists 
from doing, is something quite remarkable ! 

5. Finally, the National Union declares through its committee 
that it will help the women in Iowa who feel that a Prohibition party 
is needed, to "float the noble young ship Iowa out of the dry-dock of 
Republicanism upon the broad sea of National Prohibition. Is it pos- 
sible this organization of Christian women purpose to help certain 
women in Iowa to take the State away from a party which declares Re- 
publicanism means ' 'a school house on every hill-top and no saloons in 
the valley," and later still "Iowa will make no compromise with the 
saloon, " and which within the scope of party opportunity and to the 



70 

limit of party power has waged an heroic warfare for the home 
against the saloon. Will Christian women destroy this party ? 

This strange fulmination closes. — l 'Hold the fort for we are com- 
ing/' and may God defend the right ! 

To this prayer we reverently say amen; remembering also that it 
is written ' mot every one that saith unto me 'Lord, Lord, ' shall enter 
into the Kingdom of Heaven, but he that doeth the will of my Father 
which is in Heaven. 



THE IRREGULAR MEMORIALS FROM IOWA WOMEN. 

MRS. P. J. OVINGTON, REC. SEC, IOWA W. C. T. V. 

At the National Convention in New York the Iowa delegation was 
confronted with Memorials addressed to the National Executive Com- 
mittee signed by the Presidents of the 1st, 4th, and 8th District 
Unions, who are, ex-officio Vice-Presidents of the State Union for 
those Districts. 

These Memorials were alike in phraseology and contained the 
following charges, vis. — that " owing to the so-called non-partisan 
views of our leaders, the circulation of " The Reason Why" is for- 
bidden in Iowa, as is prohibition party literature" nor is there any 
probability of the true light ever shining into their minds" (that is the 
W. C. T. U. women of Iowa) " through our state organ" — and further 
— " that the last Annual Meeting of Iowa had adopted a By-Law that 
would debar the election of any prohibition party woman as National 
delegate, etc." 

The Memorialists declare their L { sincere belief in the need of a 
prohibition party in this nation" — " implore special help" from the 
National Union u in the way of organizers and speakers" and petition 
the National to devise some plan for our relief irrespective of the 
actions of our state convention." 

Attention is called to these facts because these Memorials were 
sent by District Presidents who had voluntarily accepted and were 
then holding office as Yice-Presidents of the Iowa State Union, whose 
Constitution expressly declared its work ll shall be non-partisan." 
These same District Presidents had offered no formal protest in the 
state convention against any of these so-called oppressions of the 
majority, (cited in the Memorials) they ignored entirely the proper 
channel through which as individuals their complaints might have 
been regularly presented to the Executive Committee, of the National 
Union, viz., through the Iowa state delegation, to the National 
Convention, but sent them direct to the N. W. C. T. U. Executive 
Committee without the sanction, and contrary to the sentiment, of the 
Districts they thus officially represented. 

Furthermore — The National Executive Committee not only 
received the Memorials thus irregularly sent, but replied to the same 
without hearing what might have been offered by the Iowa Delegation 
in refutation of the charges contained therein. 

The Convention further refused the Iowa delegation all opportu- 
nity for the discussion of either the Memorials or the answer of the 



72 

^National Executive Committee. The President of the Iowa Union, — 
Mrs. Foster — read the following statement and desired that it be 
recorded. ' l The discussion was so summarily cut off that I ask as a 
question of privilege to file this statement in behalf of the Iowa Union. 
I solemnly deny the statement of the National Executive Committee 
that the Iowa Union has pursued an unjust and intolerable course 
toward the minority. I renew the request, made in the Executive 
Committee, that the Iowa delegation be furnished all the evidence on 
which the Committee acted in coming to its conclusions" (see National 
Minutes, page 63). 

Deprived of their rights in the Convention the Iowa delegation at 
once replied through the public press declaring that " The Iowa 
Union has never suppressed the tract " The Reason Why" it has never 
forbidden the circulation of prohibition literature, and it has not 
adopted a By-Law which would debar any delegate nominated at any 
district convention, from an election at any State Convention. " 

This reply is true, and is sustained by the following facts — 

I. 

Suppression of "The Reason Why" and other "third party'' 
literature. 

The W. C. T. U. of Iowa has always been a non-sectarian, non- 
partisan organization. In the year 1885 Miss Willard the National 
President issued a leaflet The Reason Why which purported to 
contain the reason why the National Society had departed from its 
•original position and pledged its influence to the Prohibition Party. 

Miss Willard sent a copy of this leaflet to Iowa with the sugges- 
tion that its circulation would do good. The Executive Committee of 
the Iowa Union acting on this suggestion, voted to send this leaflet 
and did send it to all local unions. 

This action is a matter of record and is well remembered by Iowa 
women. The oft repeated statement that this leaflet was suppressed 
at the fountain head is thus refuted by unimpeachable evidence. 

Subsequent to this official circulation of this little pamphlet the 
Business Manager of the W. T. P. A. — in the Spring of 1886 — commu- 
nicated with the Corresponding Secretary of the Iowa Union and 
requested official sanction of his plan to ask for the appointment of a 
woman in each local union, who should become the agent of the W. 
T. P. A. and should pledge herself to labor for the introduction of its 
publications in her locality. 

To this the Executive Committee replied that it would give its 
sanction to such appointment if the business manager would agree to 
omit from the literature thus sent, such partisan literature as the 



73 

Corresponding Secretary believed would be contrary to the spirit and 
the scope of the Iowa work. 

The Executive Committee were willing and desirous that good 
literature on the many non-partisan lines of temperance work should 
be circulated in Iowa ; but they, as representing and acting for a non- 
partisan society refused to give its sanction to a plan which sought to> 
make tire local unions of Iowa a channel for the circulation of " third 
party" literature. 

The Business Manager of the W. T. P. A. did not consent to our 
limitation of his plan, and as far as we know, such an agent was not 
appointed. The State Society has, however, regularly sent out the 
bulletins of the "W. T. P. A. and the catalogues of the publications of 
the National Temperance Society, and has thus facilitated the selection 
of such literature as the Unions have chosen. This policy of the State 
Union has been recommended to the local unions and to county and 
district conventions. 

The people of Iowa read ; the women of Iowa are well informed 
on this question. The ' ; leaders" have encouraged the fullest discus- 
sion in their auxiliaries ; they have urged the election of delegates to 
conventions, who could conscientiously represent the sentiment of the 
women at home. 

To have done otherwise would have been dishonorable surrender 
of the trust committed to them. 

II. 

To the second charge it is only necessary to reply that the files of 
our state organ, the Iowa W. C. T. U. Messenger, will show that both 
sides of this pitiful partisan controversy have been presented through 
its columns, and that the advocates of the partisan policy of the 
National Union have been accorded all fair journalistic rights and 
courtesies. 

III. 

The implied charge that, in the adoption of the By Law relating 
to the election of National delegates, some new and oppressive method 
was inaugurated to prevent the minority from being represented in 
the National Convention, would be unworthy of notice had not so 
much been made of it, both in and out of the state, by the supporters 
of the partisan policy of W. C. T. U. work. 

The record of the action taken as found on page xlviii of the 
Iowa Minutes for 1888, refutes the charge completely. The record 
is " Mrs. Aldrich offered the following for adoption as a by-law to the 
constitution, stating that it simply formulated in words the practice 
of the State Union since the substitution of state representation in: 



u 

the National Convention upon the basis of paying membership, for the 
original plan of district representation. 

" Districts having over 500 members may, at their district con- 
ventions, nominate persons and present their names at the State 
convention as nominees for delegate and alternate to the National W. 
C. T. U. convention ; these nominations always being subject to the 
vote of the state convention, without debarring the district delegation 
or any delegate in the convention from presenting other nominations. 
Adopted." 

This statement ought to be sufficient explanation, but it has not 
been, and the impression that the non-partisan women in Iowa have 
grievously oppressed the partisan women in this particular has been 
industriously circulated. The facts are that under the original plan 
of representation, viz., one delegate for each congressional district of 
the State — the district Unions at their annual meetings frequently, 
but not always, elected their own delegates and alternates to the 
National Convention, these elections being reported and accepted at 
the State convention when National delegates were being elected. 
After the pro-rata basis of representation in the National, proposed 
at Indianopolis in 1879, and adopted by the National Convention at 
Washington in 1881, giving to each state, beside its ex-officio repre- 
sentation, one delegate at large, and one additional delegate for each 
500 paying members, the delegates have always been elected at the 
State instead of the District conventions, — nominations by districts 
that had 500 paying members, being subject to the vote of the state 
convention the same as other nominations. 

The nonpartisan majority have had the same opportunities for a 
free ballot and a fair count — lack of votes being the only hindrance 
to the election of any nominee. There has been a growing conviction 
in the minds of the Iowa women, that it was their solemn duty to elect 
as delegates to the National Convention those only who would repre- 
sent the principles of the Iowa Union, set forth in the Constitution, 
and general policy of society rather than their own personal sympathy 
with the partisan action of the National Union. 

This conviction has been deepened by the fact, that many times 
when a partisan woman has been sent from Iowa, as a National 
delegate, (since the introduction of the party question in 1884,) she 
has failed upon this question to represent the women who elected her. 

In the election of delegates to the last National convention, the 
non-partisan women, for the first time, refused to permit their personal 
regard for partisan women, to determine their ballot; they declared in 
their selection of delegates their conviction that women who will not 
represent those electing them, and be true to the constitution and By- 
Laws of their own State Union, are not the proper ones to represent 



that State Union in the National Convention; this lesson they have- 
been slow to learn even with the pertinent experiences of the last four 
years. 

To adduce this fact as evidence of injustice toward the minority 
is simply to manifest, ignorantly or purposely, a misunderstanding of 
the natural tendency of party work in the W. C. T. U. as well as out 
of it X ne following resolution adopted at the last annual meeting of 
the Fourth District Union in July 1889, — ayes 45, nays 13, — voiced 
the sentiment of that convention, which in addition to this resolution, 
so amended Art. 1st of the District Constitution as to expressly declare 
their District Union to be " non-partisan and non-sectarian." 

" Resolved, — That while we deplore the necessity, we feel 
compelled, by our sense of justice, our regard for the temperance cause, 
and our self respect as W. C. T. U. women, to make the following 
statement — The Union of the 4th Congressional District being 
necessarily compromised by the official act of their President declare, 
that they did not authorize, are not responsible for, do not approve the 
Memorial sent by the President of this District over her official 
signature to the Executive Committee of the National TV*. C. T. U. at. 
its last annual meeting held in New York City. We further state 
that we believe the action of the last state convention as to delegate 
and alternate from the 4th District to the last National Convention 
was perfectly fair and just and in accordance with established usage. 

The First District Convention adopted a resolution disapproving 
so much of their President's address as related to the "partisan 
political policy " — and the 8th District also adopted a non-partisan 
resolution. 

Neither of the three District Presidents were re-elected to office 
at the late District conventions. 

Thus have these District Unions refuted the charges made in 
these district Memorials, and proven that they were in accord with 
the Memorial to the National Convention, adopted by the last Annual 
Meeting of the Iowa State Union — notwithstanding the help and 
encouragement given by the National Union to the partisan minority. 

Must the party work of the N. W. C. T. U. out of which these 
distracting dissensions naturally arise be longer continued? 

Shall the wondrous opportunities and possibilities of Woman's 
Christian Temperance work be further crippled by party controversies ? 
Shall not the prayer of the Iowa Memorial be heard and the party^ 
action of the National Union be rescinded ? 



76 



POLITICAL ROBBERY. 

MRS. FLORENCE MILLER, EDITOR IOWA W. C. T. U. MESSENGER. 

The Constitution of the United States guarantees to every indi- 
vidual citizen the blessings of religious and political liberty. No in- 
dividual surrenders either his political or religious liberty to the keep- 
ing of the organization, when he becomes a member of an association 
of individuals for the promotion of business or philanthropic aims, 
even though these aims may involve political action. 

The moral influence of woman is the political power which stands 
to her in place of the ballot. This moral influence of every W. C. T. 
U. woman is pledged to the Prohibition party by the National Union. 

The declaration is made by the National Union that "the white 
ribbon army is practically solid for the Prohibition party. 

That party claims the support of "every one of the 200, 000 white 
ribboners," yet there are in the ranks of the Union, women of all par- 
ties, Republicans, Democrats, Labor Party women, and Party Prohi- 
bitionists. 

The aggregate sympathy and influence of these is given by action 
of the National Union to the Prohibition party. This aggregate in- 
fluence could not exist without individual factors; the individual is in- 
cluded in the aggregate. The organization uses the individual fac- 
tors for its purposes in giving political influence to a political party. 

In a republic the individual is the only unit of political power: 
thus the majority in the organization are guilty of political robbery if 
even only one individual stood protesting against her influence being 
given through the organization to a political party. It is a case in 
which majority rule is political tyranny. 

It strikes at the foundation principle of political liberty, is an 
outrage upon the inherent right of the individual to dispose of his po- 
litical power according to his own will. The organization, by the ar- 
bitrary will of a convention majority assumes to dispose of the political 
power of its members and proceeds to give political allegiance to a 
political party. 

Individual political liberty is a fundamental human right; thus 
the question of principle involved is larger and broader than the W. 
C. T. U. It is a question of human rights. 

It is this fact which burns into the consciousness of thinking 
women the sense of wrong wrought, until all their soul rises in loud 
protest against it. 



t 



It is this fundamental wrong in principle which fills with the 
courage of conviction the hearts of the women who stand against it, 
and presses home upon them the duty to "cry aloud and spare not." 

The right to protest has been denied, and the voice of those who 
stand for the political liberty of the individual, and against the tyranny 
which takes from her the right to bestow her political allegiance as 
she choses, is stifled in every way possible, by a majority. 

After using the power of a majority to so deprive the individual 
of political liberty, the next step is to deprive her of the right to 
" antagonize" the policy which enthralls. One tyranny begets 
another. 

The sense of justice of the country is aroused against the prac- 
tices of certain sections where the voice of a class of voters is stifled, 
because forsooth, the "ruling class" desire to keep the government a 
"white man's government;" but no greater wrong against individual 
political liberty is committed in robbing the black man of his vote 
than the N. W. C. T. U. perpetrates in taking by force through or- 
ganization action the political influence of its members who are not 
Prohibition party women, and giving their allegiance to that party. 

The sin against government is not so heinous, for woman has not 
the ballot, but the outrage against the individual is criminal. 

There is always regret that there should be differences among 
forces united for the promotion of reform. Divisions among 
the good, rejoice the forces of evil. Every friend of the liquor traffic 
rejoices that there are differences in the W. C. T. XL, and hundreds 
of women have been willing to suffer wrong in silence, rather than 
there should be public expression of division in the ranks. Hundreds of 
others have quietly dropped out of the work rather than seem to give 
comfort to the enemy by standing against a wrong among ourselves. 
Timid ones have hesitated to trust their intuitions, in opposition to 
the purpose of those in authority to whom they were accustomed to 
look for guidance. But all other considerations must yield to the 
conviction that duty demands that we stand against what is funda- 
mentally and absolutely wrong. We can never be a conquering force 
against the liquor traffic so long as we outrage and wrong each other. 
We can never unite ballots for prohibition while we rob our own of per- 
sonal political freedom. We never can be an effective instrument to 
eradicate a social and political wrong while we perpetrate a deeper 
wrong against political rights. Against this wrong it is a duty to 
protest, and duty to work for its undoing. No one who sees or feels 
the wrong should suffer it in silence. The voice of protest should 
make itself heard all over the land. 



78 



IOWA NOT ALONE. 

FEOM "'THE WHITE RIBBON." DECEMBER, 1888. 

The Union Signal of November 22, has made me realize that an 
honest confession of ignorance would be ; ; very becoming " in one 
member of the Resolutions Committee, at Louisville National Conven- 
tion. I am compelled to acknowledge, with shamefacedness and mor- 
tification, that in 1882 I did not know anything about politics or 
parties ! I had been so busy about other things that my education 
on the political line had been sadly neglected. True. I was the 
daughter of one Republican and the wife of another (and by the way. 
I have the honor to be so still), but then I only knew that there was 
such a thing as a Republican party and there was such a thing as the 
Democratic party, and I had heard some kind of a rumor that there 
was going to be a new one started: but I hadn't any idea of the ^ true 
inwardness n of the resolution which the Signal quotes, and which 
doubtless came before our committee with all due form and cere- 
mony. 

Now I should feel that I was too great an •• ignoramus" to have 
been on any important committee of the National (although that year 
I had the honor to be one of its superintendents and to do a good deal 
of hard work) were it not for the consoling speech of our dear 
• • Mother Thompson " at New York, when she said " As far as politics 
is concerned I am just a perfect ignoramus, I don't know one thing 
about it. I am too old to trouble my head on that subject." &c. In 
the company of the first crusader I am able once again to lift up my 
head and look the world in the face. 

But by the date of the St. Louis meeting in 1884. where the editor 
of the Union Signal gives me a second honorable mention, I had 
crossed the sea and got a few foreign ideas into my head, and had 
"views " on political subjects and was able to vote intelligently with 
the ''minority." against the political resolution then and there 
adopted. 

"When Mrs. Watson and Mrs. Weeks are credited with speech mak- 
ing, as is the natural inference from the words used — " discussed for 
two whole days, Mrs. Foster leading the opposition, assisted by Mrs. 
Watson and Mrs. Weeks, of Pennsylvania," I must plead i; not 
guilty " and point to the official records to sustain me. My " maiden 
speech " at a National Convention, was made in New York in 1888,. 
so I was not even an embryo talker in 1884. 






Another misstatement is, that the political resolution was " dis- 
cussed two days " in St. Louis. The records (National Minutes, page 
o'2) show that it was made the order of business for 10 a. m., on Sat- 
urday morning, and then after two hymns being sung, one "lined 
out" &c, with reading of minutes, &c, the note was taken before 
adjournment that same afternoon — about 5 P. M., if my memory is 
correct* Less than five hours may have seemed u two days " to the 
editor of the Union Signal, but it is not by the almanac. 

In Philadelphia, the Signal says a similar resolution was adopted 
;i after nearly as prolonged debate." The minutes say (see pages 31 
and 33), that the resolutions were made special order of the day at 4 
p. M. , and all were read — fourteen of them — and this one was adopted, 
before the close of the afternoon session, in less than two hours 
time. 

Neither was the resolution " discussed nearly two days " at Minne- 
apolis, as the Signal affirms. The minutes (page 46), show that it 
was first read at the evening session of October 25th — after a good 
deal of other business — and its discussion was not resumed until the 
afternoon of the 26th, likewise after other business — and it was 
adopted at that same session with ten others, some of which were 
discussed at length and very warmly, as all can testify who were 
present. 

The Signal claims to be giving " the true history of the political 
action of the W. C. T. U. from official records. 

Its premises being inaccurate, the conclusion, viz., " three National 
Conventions had each given nearly half the time of its business ses- 
sions to this matter," &c, is necessarily equally untrue. 

As one of the u malcontents " — by which courteous, Christian name 
the editor of the Signal chooses to characterize the obstructing min- 
ority " who voted against endorsing her conduct of its official columns 
— I protest against the charge that hearing the reports presented by 
our forty Grand National Superintendents was ' ' peculiarly exaspera- 
ting to the malcontents. 1 '' To me that was the one wholly agreeable 
and delightful feature of the Convention, and I believe it was to all 
the delegates. 

Accuracy of statement is something we have a right to demand 
from our " official organ," and inaccuracies similar to those I have 
indicated would, in a court of law, invalidate the entire testimony of 
the editor of the Signal. 

The offensive by-law was " willingly repealed by the majority," no 
doubt because it had made itself odious. 

The Signal further claims, as I see so many others of prominence 
in the W. C. T. U. are doing, that the resolution concerning " dis- 
loyalty" was " rejected by as large a majority as the other was 



80 

passed." Another claims it was u voted down without debate. " My 
experience has taught me the difference between adopting, rejecting 
and considering motions or resolutions. The fact is, Mrs. Benjamin 
objected to the consideration of that resolution. By vote, the Con- 
vention sustained her " objection," but that may have been for a 
variety of reasons — the lateness of the hour, the physical exhaustion 
of the delegates, or the objectionable character of the resolution. No 
one has the right to assume from the other actions of that Convention 
that it was the latter reason. My personal opinion is, if the resolu- 
tion had been ' ? considered, " or discussed and put to vote, it would 
have been adopted. I think it a logical sequence of the one preced- 
ing it, which was adopted. 

So I am not willing to concede any more liberal policy than this to 
the body which next year is to consider an amendment which reads 
"both States and individuals shall be required to respect all princi- 
ples espoused by the National Union," 

In self-defense, and in defense of the truth. 

Mrs. Jos. D. Weeks. 






81 
IOWA NOT ALONE. 

FROM A COUNTY PRESIDENT. 

Mrs. Richard Darlington, President of Chester County, Penn., 
W. C. T. U. is one of the most accomplished women in our organiza- 
tion. She is a Friend : — her low voice and gentle manners, as well as 
her unquestioned fealty to total abstinence and prohibition, well repre- 
sent a denomination of Christians always aggressive. 

Mrs. Darlington says in her annual address to the County Union : 
"In the spring-time of 1884 an accredited National organizer 
came into Chester county for the purpose of enlisting our women in 
the work of the Woman's Christian Temperance Union. We were at 
that time unacquainted with the W. C. T. U., its objects, or its 
methods of work. The constitution which we were asked to sign ex- 
plicitly stated the objects of the society to be the education of the 
people up to the standard of total abstinence, to train the young, to 
save the inebriate and to secure the legal prohibition and complete 
banishment of the liquor traffic. Any woman, so said the constitution 
may become a member by signing the constitution, pledging herself 
to do all in her power for the advancement of the temperance cause, 
paying certain dues annually into the treasury and signing the total 
abstinence pledge. The organizations were local, county, state and 
national. The dues of each woman, if paid over annually in part to 
County, part to State, part to National, keeping the residue for the 
Local, made her a component part of those four bodies. The National 
requires a certain sum per capita from its state pledged membership 
to secure the State representation in the National. — The State requires 
certain dues per capita from the county-pledged membership to secure 
that county's representation in the State, likewise the county requires 
certain dues from the local-pledged membership to secure for each 
local union its representation in the county conventions. The Local 
is its own law regarding what it requires from a member, but it must 
conform to certain defined regulations already enumerated to make it 
auxiliary to the three higher bodies. We signed the pledge, sub- 
scribed to the constitution, have paid our dues annually, Chester 
county paying this year to the State W. C. T. U. of Pennsylvania, 
nearly $400 and Pennsylvania paying to the National $1,856. The 
organizer to whose counsel we listened when we were invited to join. 
in the work of the W. C. T. U. furthermore told us that it did not 
matter of what religious belief we were, nor of what political views,, 
but that all religious denominations and all political opinions could 
work together for God and home and native land. While yet there 
were but five unions, our first convention was held and I was called 



82 

most unexpectedly to the chairmanship of this county, and I have 
given unsparingly and cheerfully for almost five years, whatever of 
time I had, whatever of talent I have, to my loved organization. 
True to the constitution, I have endeavored to do my part to educate 
public sentiment, looking forward to the day now so imminent in 
Pennsylvania when the votes at the polls shall decide for our Com- 
monwealth the question of Constitutional Prohibition. With your 
hearty co-operation and efficient labor united to that of your officers, 
we have no longer five but fifty local unions, no longer 100 but 1,500 
members. The unions which I have organized and those to whom I 
have sent organizers were enrolled as were the original, with the 
statement that our work was non-partisan and non-sectarian. 

In the autumn of 1884, in the National Convention held at St. 
Louis, the W. C. T. U. declared its allegiance to a political party and 
for the fifth time has lately re-affirmed, the same allegiance in New 
York. States in these years have fallen into line, and to use the lan- 
guage of an executive reply to an Iowa protest, also given in New 
York, the assertion goes out to the world that, under a ''tolerant pro- 
cedure, auxiliaries have fallen into line, until throughout the nation, 
except in Iowa and somewhat more than one-half of Pennsylvania, the 
white-ribboners of the country are practically solid for the Prohibition 
party." If then my organization has become practically solid for a 
political party— with the exceptions that prove the rule — what has 
become of the principles of non-partisanship with which I covenanted 
when I joined the W. C. T. U. I was free to work as an 
individual before I fraternized with the sisterhood of the 
White Ribbon; I joined for organized work and this organized work 
has declared party allegiance, and my work is now set in channels, 
through my auxiliaryship at variance with the methods set before me 
when I joined. Again "he that runs may read'' that the National in 
its executive dealings and convention acts has since its declaration for 
party manifested an arrogance, an impatient pity, a "let them alone 
and they'll come home" spirit of pretended forbearance toward the 
minority, with whom I class myself very contentedly on this question. 
Not content with a memorial and a resolution appealing for a division 
line of loyalty and disloyalty, the amendment is now offered to come 
up next year, which, if passed, requires that all States and individuals 
must respect all principles espoused by the National Union. Closer 
and closer does the majority press us with a spirit quite out of har- 
mony with sisterly comradeship. Pennsylvania stands today a house 
almost divided against itself because of this entering wedge of so- 
called loyalty to the National being driven a little harder with each 
recurring year. The State has just held a most disputatious conven- 
tion. Without and within its sessions were heard the tones of 



83 

discontent, the voice of censure, and a resort to unwise methods but 
increasing these dissensions. In Chester county the storm has not yet 
burst; at least your chairman knows only of a spirit of forbearance 
and oneness of resolve; but while you and I together may look only 
over white sails on a smooth sea, we know that we are not of one 
opinion on this 4rery question of political work which has lately rocked 
our State organization, and witnessed the discomfiture and humilia- 
tion of that goodly minority constituting a part of the National Con- 
vention held in New York city. I say humiliation, for who is so se- 
rene, or so beyond the shafts of parliamentary defeat as to have her 
plea for u rights,laid upon the table by a majority," while the cheers 
of that majority resound through the auditorium to the echo of that 
vote. We are not of one opinion. Can we arrogate to ourselves any 
superior grace, wisdom or mastery over our own spirit and have no 
fears that we shall in our beloved county organization sooner or later 
repeat the history of our State ? Can I afford to carry on the bur- 
den of my work in so-called disloyalty to Miss Willard and you, my 
sister, work on in so-called loyalty and no misapprehensions of my 
work cross the usefulness of your labors, or misapprehension of your 
labor cross the usefulness of mine ? I do not distrust your fealty to 
me at this hour, but let us meet the issue now while there is no dis- 
trust, while all is fair and open. I cannot be a distrusted auxiliary 
of the National nor can I remain a stumbling block in the advance- 
ment of partisan W. C. T. IT. work and workers. 

To such intelligent women as constitute our local membership in 
Chester county I need not say that all the lines of our department ef- 
forts lead in the end to legislative enactment as the capstone. Our 
scientific instruction efforts were to procure law first to give the study 
of alcoholic effects to children that they in manhood might intelligently 
mould laws to protect humanity from the curse of rum. Our depart- 
ment of narcotics logically leads to legislation; the same of the social 
purity department. And to whom shall we to-day petition as non-voters 
but to the law-makers at Harrisburg for submission and for laws 
evolved from other departments ? To whom shall we go for the repeal 
of the internal revenue on whisky; for prohibition in the District of 
Columbia; for national prohibition; for Mormon legislation except to 
the United States Congress ? Shall we go before those bodies as par- 
tisans in fealty with any one political party, or as women working- 
unitedly for humanity, the broad basis on which many of us entered 
the W. C. T . U ? What are you going to do about it ? After a care- 
ful, earnest analysis of my own responsibilities to myself and to you, 
prayerfully and conscientiously, I have decided that I cannot continue 
as an individual in auxiliaryship to the National, nor can I continue 
as a county leader of a union auxiliary to the National." 



84 

This annual meeting subsequently re-elected its former 
President, Mrs. Darlington, and submitted the question of non- 
partisanship and auxiliaryship to the vote of the local unions in the 
county. 

At a meeting of the Executive Committee representing these 
unions, the following resolutions of non-partisanship and non-auxiliary- 
ship were adopted : 

FROM "THE WHITE RIBBON," PENNSYLVANIA — JAN., 1889, 
CHESTER COUNTY. 

All are anxious to know the result of the Executive Committee 
meeting of Chester county on the 12th. Sixty-five members were 
present; sixtj-one voting " non-partisan," twenty-five voted to remain 
auxiliary to the National Union, and thirty-six against so remaining, 
while four were neutral. The officers continue to serve by a unanim- 
ous vote. The recording Secretary of the National was sent by the 
general officers to the meeting to "make explanations and render 
assistance." She was not received, however, as the committee doubt- 
less felt that they had already become u thoroughly conversant with 
the plans and methods of the organization," and were quite competent 
to decide as to their duty in the whole matter. The following resolu- 
tions were adopted : 

Whereas, The National W. C. T. U. in Convention assembled in New York, 
reaffirmed its allegiance to the Prohibition Party, and openly avowed our organi- 
tion practically solid for the Prohibition party ; and, 

Whereas, We constitute a chain of auxiliary organizations, Local, County, 
State and National, and the annual dues of a Local member are, in part, paid to 
the National, it follows logically that any declaration on our part as Local or 
County Unions of non-partisan work is contradictory and inconsistent with our- 
contributive auxiliaryship to the National W. C. T. U., and the merest mockery 
of individual privilege ; therefore, 

Resolved^ That we solemnly declare, in executive session convened, our position 
in Chester county to be as originally organized, non-partisan. 

That as the National is partisan in action and in declaration, we will withold 
our dues from the National body, and renewedly pledge ourselves to the work of 
our departments. 

That while we no longer sustain the policy of the National so far as it has 
pledged our organization to the Prohibition party, we are not opposing the Prohi- 
bition party, nor endorsing any other political party. 

That we are non-partisan from principle, because we believe entering upon 
party politics inconsistent with the sacred calling of the W. C. T. U., and from 
policy, because we are convinced that by allying ourselves with the Prohibition 
party we necessarily antagonize temperance men in the Republican and Demo- 
cratic parties, hinder the increase of our membership among a number of earnest 
temperance women everywhere, hinder the growth of the temperance sentiment 
and the cause of Constitutional Prohibition. 



85 

That as representatives of the W. C. T. U. non-partisan and non-auxilary, we 
assume the responsibility of planting kindred organizations over our county, and 
where no such Unions exist we will invite women to become auxiliary to our 
County W. C. T. U. 

That while we do not desire to draw to our ranks any local Union satisfied with 
its partisan allegiance, we cordially invite any Union to our fellowship that would 
find its principles better represented by our platform. 

In view of the fact that the majority of the Chester county Unions have voted 
to change^the relations heretofore existing between them and the N. W. C. T. U. 
by witholding their dues from the same. 

That we request our County President, Recording Secretary and Corresponding 
Secretary to withdraw their resignations, and that they continue to act with us 
and for us in our Chester county W. C. T. U. 

That we send our dues this spring as usual to our County Treasurer to be for- 
warded to the State Treasurer, with directions to the State to withold the National 
dues of such Unions as have so resolved from that organization. 

The position Chester county has taken is of great importance, 
involving many points of interest that can only be settled by the State 
in Convention. The minority refuses to withdraw from the Union, 
but asked to be allowed to still pay their dues to the National. 



*6 



IOWA NOT ALONE— THE WHITE RIBBON, PENNSYLVANIA 

W. C. T. U. 

AN OPEN LETTER TO THE W. C. T. U*S OF PENNSYLVANIA. 

My dear friends : — Yours of is received, and I thank you for the kind 

sisterly tone of your comunications. Although we may differ in opinion, we can 
at least, respect each other's convictions, and have confidence in each other's 
convictions, and have confidence in each other's honesty of purpose, and desire 
to think and act right. You evidently feel that it is disloyal and wrong to criticise 
the acts of the National W. C. T. U. But to my mind, one of the objects of orga- 
nization is to secure all the thought and wisdom of many minds rather than of one 
individual, and if we refuse the members of our organization the privilege of 
expressing their views, we become very narrow. Our ministers and church 
officers go to their various ecclesiastical courts, and are not considered disloyal 
when they criticise, even with severity, the action of said bodies. They claim 
that privilege, as, indeed, the humblest member does. The Roman Catholic 
is the only one that refuses this, and, for the Pope alone, is claimed in- 
falibility. At the Convention in New York the whole spirit, as well as action 
of the majority, showed plainly that the minority was considered disloyal. 
This feeling has grown increasingly manifest during the last few years, and the 
minority now demands the right to be heard. I disclaim the inference that it is 
disloyal to express disapprobation of the measures or methods of an organization 
in which all have equal rights. Rather it is the duty of members to "cry aloud 
and spare not," when they see that mistakes vital to the life and usefulness of 
the organization are being made. I am fully persuaded that endorsing a political 
party has been wrong, not only in policy, but principle, and the bitterness and 
restlessness brought into our Union by such action assures me that my first im- 
pulse to refrain from it was the true one. Then if this is my feeling, why should 
I not express it and urge our women to turn back from what I earnestly believe 
to be the wrong way ? While, as individuals, every one of our members might 
sympathize with a party which advocates the principles we have espoused, yet as 
a corporate body we cannot endorse that party without losing our opportunity to- 
influence those interested in other parties. I do believe that if the W. C. T. U. 
had kept to its own legitimate lines of work, it would have been much stronger 
and more influential to-day. But, as it is, we are antagonizing those whom we 
wish to influence, both in the church and out of it, many of our ministers even, 
raying that the W. C. T. U. has no more claim upon their sympathy than any other- 
political party. We thus lose the opportunity to win people to our way of thinking y 
and consequently to our way of rating (if we had that privilege). 

But you say, perhaps, that "we have nothing to do with policy " I think we 
have. In my dictionary "to be politic" is defined " to be prudent. We must 
take things as we find them. It is useless for us to say, " But how can any one 
who pretends to be for prohibition have anything to do with parties whose plat- 
form, as expounded by their adherents, may be quoted to prove much more than 
passive connivance with the corrupt traffic permitted to grow to such enormous 
proportions." As temperance women of most radical sort, we are a unit as to- 
our abhorence of the liquor traffic. Our aim is its utter extermination. 



All are willing to admit that the principles of the Third Party are right — but some 
honestly question tha expediency of its methods. We must acknowledge that 
there are good / earnest and honest advocates of prohibition in all parties, and 
many of these are n embers of our Unions. We must, in charity, respect their 
convictions, and wruPn the majority, no matter how large it may be, votes to 
endorse any party, tie majority is treated unjustly, because they cannot so en- 
dorse, and their vi^-f are to them as much a matter of principle as are those of 
the majority. \ r- 

Again, it is very doubtful whether either or any party would be able for many 
years to accomplish much in the way of prohibitory legislation. Dr. T. L. Cuyler 
in a recent article in the New York Evangelist expresses fear that the temperance 
reform may be "swamped in the trough of the political sea," and further says : 
*' What then ? Shall all efforts to suppress, or even to curtail, the traffic in intox- 
icants be abandoned ? Assuredly not. But since the saloon has so many support- 
ers in the ranks of both parties, the great question of suppressing or reducing the 
dram shops should be pressed on its own merits, outside of all partisanship. While 
the two great parties are divided on such national questions as the tariff or 
kindered issues, the temperance reform should stand or fall, sink or swim, survive 
or perish on its <nvn merits, irrespective of all partisanship. It never should be, it 
never can be, lashed fast to the political fortunes of either party, to rise or fall 
with the rise or fall of either of them. Nor should it ever be a mere foot ball, to 
be kicked back and forth between the parties. 

" After forty years of gratuitous and earnest labor in this blessed cause, I am 
solemnly convinced that if it is left to the tender mercies of partisan politicians, 
it will be assassinated ! " 

The women of Pennsylvania are working earnestly for a Prohibitory Amendment 
to our- Constitution. We do not wish to alienate any friend of this measure. In 
other words, we want to be " non-partisan " and go up to our Legislature, plead- 
ing with every man to submit the question to the people on its own merits and at 
such time as will ensure its acceptance by the people. Do we not realize how we 
prejudice our cause if we go to them as partisans ? Earnestly asking for the Holy 
Spirit that our W. C. T. U. may make no mistakes, and that all our efforts may be 
for God's glory and the best interests of the work hitherto so blessed and pros- 
pered, I am Faithfully yours, 
Jan. '89. Frances L. Swift, President. 



88 



{Reprinted From the Union Signal of January 10, 1889.) 

IOWA NOT ALONE— THE CONDITION THAT CONFRONTS THE 

TV. C. T. U. 

[The clauses in brackets have been added since the first publication H. G. E.] * 
BY HELEN GILBERT ECOB 

Dear Union Signal: — "I promise protection to the minority." 
These were Miss Willard's words when she accepted the presidency of 
the W. C. T. U. at its 15th Convention. In accordance with this prom- 
ise Miss Willard invites me to "make clear" the position of the 
non-partsan members of this organization. This is as it should be. 
Around the hearthstone of the Union Signal, we who love the W. 0. 
T. U. should dispassionately " reason together." It is not with the 
wish u introduce the apple of discord " that this letter is written, but 
to show the only way in which this objectionable fruit can be removed. 
Neither is it an indication of ill will. Approval is the pleasure of 
love, but dissent and rebuke are often its highest and noblest duty. 

As an organization we have solved the problem of Christian unity, 
and now we are brought face to face with another problem, tliat of 
organic unity. The basis of this unity is the principle of prohibition. 
It is needless to say that on this basis we are a unit. 

That this principle is an adequate ground of unity is proved by the 
history of the W. C. T. U. It had organized its system, perfected its 
plans and grown to its present proportions before (its alliance with) 
the Third party existed. It is also proved by the declaration that 
each member can be free as to her political affiliations. If one can 
be free, all can be free; which is nothing less than the freedom of the 
entire body. There was never a thought of majorities and minorities 
until [the endorsement of Woman Suffrage, and afterward the 
prohibition] party alliance was made an integral part of National W. 
C. T. U. policy. 

A consciousness of majorities and minorities in such an organiza- 
tion as this indicates that something is wrong ; [that some action has 
been taken not in harmony with the original plan of organic unity.] 
That which was a mistake in the year 1882 has become a wrong in 
1888. To indorse a mistake is to make it a wrong. It is a matter of 
indifference as to who framed the resolution of the Louisville Conven- 
tion, or how long and how eloquently the resolution on party committal 
has been debated. The mistake is upon us. The " virus" will 
continue to spread until the cause is removed. Had the Memorial of 



89 

1884 been accepted by the Republican party instead of the Third party, 
the violation of principle would have been the same. The case is not 
altered because we have been slow to recognize the mistake. The 
policy of the National Society has not been generally understood, 
though the disastrous results of party alliance have been predicted by 
many seers. We have been " slow of heart to believe all that the 
prophets have spoken." 

The minority believe that party alliance hinders prohibition. 
The work of moral suasion and education which must be done before 
prohibition is secured can be accomplished more rapidly apart from 
party political action. Nothing so awakens prejudice and opposition 
as the subject of party politics. Our masculine friends say that it is 
woman's ignorance of practical politics which makes her willing to 
jeopardize her work in this bitter imbroglio. 

*' Fools rush in where angels fear to tread." When, in the 
process of evolution, the ballot has come into the hands of woman, and 
we have had some years of experience in practical politics, we may 
be better qualified to judge whether it is wise to risk our sacred work 
in this dangerous field. This is the policy of our great ecclesiastical 
bodies, which, while taking the most strenuous attitude for prohibition 
have been careful to avoid alliance with any party. 

The Republican party may be composed of hypocrites, who make 
large promises to the friends of temperance, while they secretly 
oonnive for the rum vote. Democrats may openly espouse the saloon. 
The Third party may be composed of saints and rejoice in an irreproach- 
able platform. Every member of the W. C. T. U. may favor the 
Third party. None of these things move us. As a corporate body we 
should ally ourselves to none of them. As individuals we may have 
■our party preferences, but we can work much more efficiently if, even 
as individuals, we are willing to hold our party affiliations in abeyance, 
just as the Christian works more effectively when he forgets that he is 
a denominationalist. 

This is Scriptural teaching. Paul said, "To the Jews, I became 
a Jew, that I might gain the Jews ; to them that are under the law, 
as under the law, that I might gain them which are under the law. 
To the weak became I as weak that I might gain the weak. I am 
become all things to all men, that I may save some." So to the 
Republican the Prohibitionist becomes a Republican, to the Democrat 
he becomes a Democrat, to the Third party, he becomes Third party, 
that by any means he may save Prohibition. When the Holy Spirit 
•descended on the Church at Jerusalem, the disciples began to speak 
with other tongues, the multitude was confounded because that 
-every man heard them speak in the tongue wherein he was born. If 
the disciples had refused to speak in any language except the orthodox 



90 

Hebrew, they would not have been understood, and the pentecostal 
blessing would not have come. The Prohibitionist should address 
every man in the political language wherein he was born. 

The non-partsian exalts nothing but Prohibition. He condemns 
license, low or high. Yet we believe that to many honest souls, 
license means restriction. Prohibition is the " unknown God " whom 
the multitude ignorantly worship in high license. That unknown God 
we declare unto them. "The times of ignorance God winked at.' r 
The disciple is not above his Master. 

When the children of Israel desired a king the Lord said unto 
Samuel, "Hearken unto the voice of the people, howbeit protest 
solemnly unto them and show them the manner of king which shall 
reign over them." Oh the patience of the Lord, who Avaits until we 
learn, by bitter experience, the great truths we refuse to learn except 
by failure. Always teaching, always protesting, the Prohibitionist 
must wait with God-like patience, until with slow step, the multitude 
have learned the great truth that the liquor traffic cannot be legalized 
without sin. 

Alliance with the Third party is defended on the ground that it is 
the latest evolution of the temperance reform. This assumes that all 
evolution is good. There is evolution upward, and evolution down- 
ward. We may expect an egg to evolve a chick, but sometimes it 
evolves the other way. No great moral movement has ever been 
brought about through a political organization. Yotes, they are 
bought and sold and exchanged in the market. We want conscience 
which cannot be traded. Take care of the thoughts, and actions will 
take care of themselves. Take care of the conscience, and the vote 
will take care of itself. What would have been the result if Luther 
had begun the reformation by saying, " I must have a political party 
to enforce my new doctrine." Our Puritan fathers were a "concen- 
trated power." but they were not a political party. The Parnellites 
are not on the road to Home Rule for Ireland by the operation of a 
new political organization, they arc simply operating on the conscience 
of all parties. They have acted on the public conscience until they 
have compelled recognition of their cause and have been adopted by a 
party. The serfs of Russia and Brazil were not freed by organization 
neither were the slaves of our own county. The abolitionists were a 
great and masterful conscience. Their true ministry in the nation 
antedates their political organization. 

Prohibition is not a failure through lack of a party committed to 
its enforcement. It is a failure through lack of conviction. If the 
public conscience were now ready for prohibition it would find 
expression in the vote of the people. 



91 

Prohibition is not 'incarnate " in the Third party, and will not 
be until the principles; of that party are embodied in laic. The 
training of the public ^conscience to the issue of prohibition will 
necessarily be a slow process. Meantime the saloon has all it wants. 
The Third party refused to accept any restrictive measures which are 
not conducted -accoroSng to its own system. The disciples said, 
4 ' Master*, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and we forbade 
him, because he follqlweth us not." Jesus said, " Forbid him not. 
He that is not against us is for us." 

The balance of power which might now be used as a scourge upon 
both dominant partic s - is entirely wasted. 

The partisan actionAof the W. C. T. XL being based on a false 
principle, is disastrous in result. We want to organize in new fields, 
and our partisanship clocks the way. Grand women whose help we 
sorely need, are kept pom joining our ranks. Other faithful workers 
must withdraw. We .want to hold our meetings in a church, the 
authorities refuse bee wise we are a political party. They say "If the 
Third party holds its meetings in the church, then the Republicans and 
Democrats must hold heir caucuses there, too. Ministers refuse to 
read our notices. We solicit funds to carry on our various works, and 
are refused because of our party proclivities. Everyone who has done 
work in the Legislature knows how futile is partisan action there. 
Personally I have known several of our ablest legislators, grand 
temperance men, who have taken their political life in their hands to 
forward our work. In return they have been " knifed" at the polls 
by the Prohibitionists. Does it not recall the old fable of the serpent 
warmed to life in the bosom of the rustic ? 

Practically it is impossible to be a member of the W. C. T. U. and 
u as individuals be free as to our political affiliations.'' The mantle of 
the parent society rests on every one of us. Our dues go into a 
partisan treasury ; much of the work given us by our state and National 
officers is of a partisan character. [The reports of State and National 
treasurers show expenditures largely for the salary of officers and 
for expenses connected with conventions. 

When these officers work in the interest of a party, and the con- 
vention is pledged and gives support to a party, the funds of the Union 
are expended for partisan purposes. Individuals cannot remain free 
from partisan work while members of it are supporting the partisan 
National Union. State Unions although declaratively non-partisan 
cannot be really free from the evils of partisan work so long as they 
r-emain auxiliary to the partisan National Union.] We cannot serve 
two masters. 

' ; The majority which elected our National President, Benjamin 
Harrison, compels no one to be a Republican, or to work in Republican 



• 92 

channels. I have heard of no county which has refused to pay 
taxes, or to belong to the United States." Let the majority which 
elected our National President attempt anything like oppression, 
and instantly the minority will resent thl oppression. If the 
dominant party should undertake to compel ewry Democrat to help 
pay their campaign bills and to vote for Republican measures, the 
Democrats would cry out against it. In our Legislatures all parties 
have freedom of debate. 

The minority in the nation is continually doira the very thing that 
is likely to come to pass in the minority of the W. C. T. U. The min- 
ority in the nation is resisting and blocking evc'w individual action of 
the majority. 

[Majorities have only the right to <Cp right.] 

Is the action of the National Convention in alVying us to a political 
party then oppressive ? It is either oppression r>r meaningless. 

[If the action is not representative, the Union cannot in truth be 
called u partisan." Would Miss Willard have' declared the National 
Union ll almost solidly partisan "had she no.', understood the party 
action as representative? If that action is representative it is bind- 
ing.] If the action of the National is binding, upon whom is it 
binding and to what does it bind? Plainly it is binding on every 
State, county and individual auxiliary to it, Plainly it binds us to 
the Third party. 

To hold that the right of States is inviolate — [that State Unions 
can of right be non-partisan when the National of which State 
Unions are a part is partisan] — is an absurdity. The National W. 
C. T. U. sustains the same relation to its auxiliaries that Congress 
sustains to the States of our Union. Upon the internal regulations 
of a state, Congress does not attempt to legislate, but where it does 
legislate, its power is absolute. If Congress declares war, every 
State is compelled to war, and every citizen is subject to draft, 
whether he will or no. If Congress had not this power, there would 
be no reason for its existence. The action of the National W. C. T. 
U. is binding on every auxiliary. If it is binding only on itself there 
is no reason for its existence ; its position is illogical and absurd. If 
the N. W. C. T. U. refuses to listen to the demand of the minority for 
freedom there is only one course left. It is a painful but heroic 
course. The May-flowers of the W. C. T. U. must sail from the 
mother-home which gave it birth. 

After the Convention there was an announcement that the attitude 
of the National W. C. T. U. was simply advisory. To make it 
authoritative, the Convention itself must first withdraw from the 



93 

Third party, and then advise alliance with it. We are not satisfied 
with an unconstitutional, unofficial explanation. With Paul we say 
"Lj they seek to thrust us out privily? but let them come them- 
selves, and fetcli us out." 

In the Union Signal of January 31, 1889, " A White Ribboncr," 
corrected ''Mrs. Eeob's Mistake," in terming the above declaration 
aa "not authoritative/' ;, an unconstitutional unofficial explanation,'* 
reminding us that " It has always been understood since the Indian- 
apolis Convention in 1879," that "no principle avowed nor plan 
devised by the National W. C. T. U. was obligatory on any State or 
local Union " except total abstinence and the payment of annual dues. 
On page 282 of the Nashville Minutes stands this by By-Law (art*, 
viii., sec. 2): No State Union shall be bound by any principle 
espoused or plan devised by the National W. C. T. U., except that 
all States auxiliary must subscribe to the total abstinence pledge and 
to the Constitution of the National Union" — 

The Correction of White Ribboner deserves attention. 

The announcement that the partisan attitude of the National was 
simply advisory, did rest, it seems, upon the authoritative declaration 
of a By-Law — but it does not rest upon a basis of fact. 

Representative action is binding upon those represented and com- 
mits them to the position taken. 

The adoption of an illogical absurd theory of representative action 
in 1879, was a mistake. Its incorporation in a By-Law was another 
mistake. 

The adoption of the partisan resolution in 1884 was a still graver 
mistake. The use of an absurd theory in upholding that partisan 
action is more than a mistake, it is a blundering inconsistency. Con- 
fusion and connection has resulted from the inevitable contradiction 
between words and facts. 

The officers of the National Union recognize that partisan action as 
representative and authoritative. It is not meaningless. If it 

^horizes the partisan work of the officers, editor of the official organ, 
aion Signal, and the accredited speakers of the National Union. 
It is the authority for the publication of partisan literature i l issued 
by the W. G. P. A. bearing the imprint of the National W. C. T. U. 
or the Union Signal" The general public rightfully considers that 
partisan attitude as representative of the Union "in its 
entirety." 

Individuals and auxiliaries feel the binding effect of that declared 
attitude even while protesting against it, the general understanding 
of the women, and the By-Law to the contrary notwithstanding." 



94 

The "mistakes" of the National can only be corrected by returning 
to the original basis of unity — by rescinding the partisan action, and 
adopting a correct theory of representative action. 

This can be done by the repeal of the By-Law, and the adoption of 
the amendment offered by Mrs. Campbell of Penna. The adoption of 
that amendment would leave individuals free as to party relation and 
would remove the present "root of bitterness. " 

Shall it be done ? H. G. B. 

Albany, June 15, 1889. 

Proposed amendment to the X. W. C. T. U. Constitution. 

The object of this organization shall be to interest and unite the 
women of this nation in non-sectarian and non-partisan Temperance 
work, for the reformation of the intemperate, the education of public 
sentiment in favor of total abstinence and prohibition of the traffic in 
all alcoholic beverages, for the promotion of social purity, the sup- 
pression of vice and crime, and the education of the masses in regard 
to the duties and responsibilities of good citizenship. 



95 



IOWA NOT ALONE. 

WHAT IS THE MISSION OF THE W. C. T. U. — MRS. L. H. WILSON, ILLINOIS. 

In its infancy the Woman's Christian Temperance Union was con- 
fessedly non-sectarian and non-partisan. It set no one church nor one 
political party above another,, but labored with unselfish devotion for 
the greatest good of all, seeking to antagonize none; but in 1884 it 
took a new departure,, and in a resolution passed at the National con- 
vention held at St. Louis, it avowed its determination to lend the aid 
and influence of the N. W. C. T. U. to the Prohibition or Third party, 
leaving State organizations and individuals free to hold their own po- 
litical views. It has reaffirmed its allegiance to that party every year 
since. As the National is made up of State organizations, and they 
of district organizations, and they of county organizations, and they 
of local organizations, and they of individuals, it is difficult to see 
how the National can be loyal to anything when the elements of 
which it is composed are wandering off in other directions, each at 
its own sweet will ; and, as might have been forseen, various conflic- 
tions have arisen. Mrs. Rounds, our own State President, is nothing 
if not logical, and she was quick to discern the weakness of this posi- 
tion. She is a strong Third Party woman and under her leadership 
the W. C. T. U. of Illinois, in convention assembled at Macomb last 
fall, went a step farther and passed the following resolution : 

"Resolved that it is the sense of the Illinois \V. C. T. U. that no member has 
the right from the public platform to antagonize the policy indicated by the St. 
Louis resolution, or denounce the party to which our influence is given, and fur- 
ther, than any member thus antagonizing our policy becomes thereby disloyal to 
our organization and is no longer entitled to wear our badge." 

Now my first objection to this attitude on the part of the W. C. 
T. U. is a personal one, which is of small importance except as I am 
the representative of many others. One of the strongest desires of a 
majority of the members of the W. C. T. TJ. is that with the ballot in 
her hand each woman may record her vote against the evils and 
abuses that afflict the State, according to her own convictions of right 
and duty. Every indication points to the fact that the day is not dis- 
tant when this revolution will take place; consequently there is nothing 
wrong nor unbecoming in a woman's entertaining and avowing strong 
political convictions. I have my political preferences and they seem 
to me convincing, and well grounded, but I don't wish to force them 
on any man or woman, nor on any body of men or women, nor do I 
wish even a semblance of forcing such opinions, to be exercised on me. 



When for the second time I became a member of the organization 
I did so under protest, because I was not at all in sympathy with the 
Third Party on many points and neither wished nor expected it to be- 
come a dominant party. For one thing I think it is a superfluity; for 
whatever a majority of the people demands, the legislators, as their 
servants, are bound to grant, and when public opinion demands pro- 
hibition, the dominant party, whether it be Democratic, Republican or 
Prohibition, will grant it. I will bring proofs to substantiate this as- 
sumption further on. 

I could give my reasons for not favoring this party at great length 
if it were necessary, but they would not be likely to prove of interest 
or importance to any one except myself. My apology for taking up so 
much time in stating my personal objection is, that I know while do- 
ing this I am stating the feeling of many others on this question. 
Entertaining these convictions I took the opportunity when Miss 
Helen Walker was at my house last summer to absolve myself from 
seeming to appear under false pretenses, and she replied that my 
opinions were a matter of no importance whatever to any one but my- 
self, that I could interpret the resolution if I chose as applying to the 
party of my choice, and express my loyalty to it in any manner I saw 
fit, but according to the resolution of the Illinois convention there is 
limit to such expressions. While they may be whispered in the ear in 
closets, they must not be proclaimed upon the housetops. 

"When a woman will she will, you may depend on't, 
When she won't she won't and there's an end on't." 

Man may be bound by such resolutions, but woman, never ! If 
this resolution of the W. C. T. U. means anything it abridges the right 
of a large minority to believe as they please, and avow their convic- 
tion when and where they see fit, responsible only to God and their 
own consciences; if it means nothing it is a stumbling block and rock 
of offense. This resolution is not only devious and misleading to the 
rank and file, but it puts us in a false position before the world, and 
leads to misunderstandings among ourselves. There are no greater 
lights among the ranks of the W. C. T. U. than Mary T. Lathrop, of 
Michigan, and Louise S. Rounds, of Illinois. Mrs. Rounds in her an- 
nual address delivered last fall at Macomb uses this language: 
"Again and again we are assailed with the declaration that the W. 
C. T. U. is a political party. I deny the charge. " 

Mrs. Lathrop, after a mos'; stirring address at the X. W. C. T. 
TL, begins the final paragraph of her speech with the assertion, 
"Lastly we are a political organization." According to the diametri- 
cally opposite character of the views held by two women so promi- 
nent in the counsels of the organization as these, the uncertainty of 
Horatio, whether "to be or not to be," is nothing to the uncertainty 



1 



as to whether we arc or are not bound to the Third Party. Again, it 
engenders dissensions and bitterness between the majority and the 
minority. No person can be blind to this fact who reads dispassion- 
ately the minutes of the W. C. T. U. as reported in the Union Sig- 
nal. If it were fully defined just how far the resolution binds the in- 
dividual member everybody would know just what to do. If, as Mrs. 
Rounds says, we are not a political party, every member has the 
right to % go into politics on her own individual responsibility where and 
how she chooses, and no other member has the right to criticise her 
political action any more than the minister has the right to criticise 
the political action of an elder or a deacon, but if as Mrs. Lathrop says, 
"we are a political organization," then the women in our ranks with 
Democratic and Republican preferences are bound with a chain 
grievous to be borne. Such a state of things cannot exist without 
heart burning and strife even among Christian women, and the proof 
is before us in these records that hard things were said and done on 
all sides; they were not confined to one person nor one faction. As 
members of the W. C. T. IT. we represent organized Christian effort, 
which in all other departments of work for the uplifting of humanity, 
is quite distinct from organized political effort. No doubt good 
women can do much and have done much to purify politics, but each 
one should stand for herself alone and not for any Christian organiza- 
tion. That is formed for another purpose and supplies another want. 
Good men, Christian ministers, and pious elders are all identified with 
some political party with great advantage to the party, but no one 
wishes to identify the church with any party. Everyone recognizes 
the fact that it would be unbecoming and unseemly. It labors for the 
good of all and one important element of its usefulness, viz : its im- 
partiality, would thereby be withdrawn. I am not in favor of lending 
the influence of the W. C. T. U. to any political party, for politics in 
its restricted sense is at best a muddy pool. Whether it is necessarily 
so is not the question. It is enough for our present purpose that it is 
unquestionably so. I have heard women declare that they could do a 
large washing, and afterwards black the stove and scrub, in white 
apron and spotless linen collar and cuffs without soiling them with 
spot or stain. I am not prepared to say they can't do it, but I can 
truthfully say that I never saw it done. The Third Party Prohibition- 
ists claim to be great sufferers from the accumulation of political mud 
thrown by their opponents, but it does not require very close investi- 
gation to see that their own hands are by no means clean. For one 
thing they are profuse in the use of epithets. Such terms as liar, 
hypocrite, Pharisee and thief flow as glibly from their pens as from 
that of any Republican or Democrat that lives. If they do not make 
damaging statements about their opponents that they know to be false, 



98 






they do make such statements without knowing them to be true. 
Witness the unprovoked attack of the Voice on Dr. Theodore Cuyler. 
of [New York; the particulars of which it is not necessary to give at 
this time. The Lance, which is the Illinois organ of the Third Party, 
in an editorial on the corruptions of the Republican party, after enu- 
merating the various enormities committed by it, says : 

"And these and other assaults upon the purity of the ballot, were supple- 
mented by a system of wilful lying, intimidations and cruel persecution without 
parallel in the political history of the nation, and all done under the hypocritical 
cry of a 'free ballot and a fair count.' It is the Pharisees who are doing this, 
men of prominence and respectability, who raise these large sums of money, 
knowing the use to which they will be put; men who deal openly in corruption 
one day and go to church the next." 

The Lever introduces this editorial by saying : 

"The written evidence of its scoundrelism having been destroyed, it is next 
to impossible to secure positive proof." 

Now I appeal to any fair minded person in this audience if this is 
not throwing political mud with a vengeance: making the most damag- 
ing statements, couched in the strongest possible language and then 
admitting that you cannot prove your charges. ' 'But, " says one, "are 
not other partisan newspapers guilty of those acts ?" If they are, 
their culpability is of no moment to us as members of the W. C. T. U., 
for the influence of our organization is not pledged to them. Do we 
want its white garments soiled by this association. Nay, verily. 
Another practical objection to this position is its utter hop' 
ncss. As sure as there is a God in Isreal a healthful storm of awakened 
and purified public sentiment will breakover our land, sweeping into 
oblivion the noxious vapors of intemperance ; but there is not a cloud 
as big as a mans hand to indicate that it will ever come through the 
Third Party. It is true it polled 100,000 more votes in '88 than it did 
in '84, but the increase was only relative. A writer in the Century 
is authority for the statement that the popular vote of '88 was increased 
1 ,000,000 ballots over that of '84. According to these figures only ten 
per cent, of the increase went to the Third party and 90 per cent, to 
the others. According to an official statement of the popular vote at 
the late election, and published by Secretary Bayard, six Southern 
States and one Xorthern State cast less than 700 votes apiece for Fisk 
and Brooks. One Southern State, South Carolina, did not record a 
single vote for those candidates. Twenty-four States cast les3 than 
10,000 votes apiece, and only six States cast 20,000 and upwards. If 
the number of these votes is the measure of temperance sentiment in 
our land, the outlook is gloomy indeed, especially in the Southern 
States, but thanks to God it is not so. 






\ 



99 

In the four years during which the W. C. T. U. has lent its influ- 
ence tQ the Third Party, it has never accomplished anything in the 

way of temperance legislation through that party. Effective work in 
that direction has been accomplished, but it has been strictly on non- 
partisan lines. On the contrary, its adherence to the party has in 
many instances been detrimental to t he best interests of the organiza- 
tion. Iu proof of this assertion I will qoute from the minutes of the 
N. W. 0. T. XL, as found in the Union Signal) Mrs. Hoffman, I 
think from Missouri, spoke as follows : 

"The argument brought against the action of this great organization in en- 
dorsing the policy and position of the prohibition party is, that it would antago- 
nize the other parties, so that legislators would not give us the legislation we de- 
sire. Is it true ? The first temperance law ever passed by the Congress of the 
United States, was passed in the year 1885, and was the scientific temperance in- 
struction law, signed by Grover Cleveland, and our own Mary Hunt has the pen 
he signed it with." 

To this Mrs. Tilton, of Washington, D. C. made reply on the 
following day : 

"I speak from the standpoint of the sensitive, throbbing heart of this nation, 
the one place at least where up to this time only non-partisan women have utilized 
temperance sentiment and crystalized it into more. The only temperance law 
ever passed in Congress was the scientific temperance instruction law, which I 
had the honor of assisting Mrs. Mary H. Hunt, our National Superintendent, to se- 
cure. I was surprised to hear last night the statement that this law could be 
claimed as a trophy of the Third Party W. C. T. U. My sisters, the Third Party 
has not yet been strong enough to secure any law in Congress. The men to whom 
we appealed belonged to the two dominant parties. We appealed to them from a 
non-partisan, Christian standpoint. We could work in no other way. Mrs. Angie 
F. Newman, superintendent of work among Mormon women, has been obliged 
to work on the non-partisan line. Her eloquent words have won the aid of strong 
men of all parties and her success stands a monument to non-partisan Christian 
work. Since the more pronounced Third Party stand has been taken by the 
National, she has met decided opposition on the ground that the organization she 
represents is hostile to the men she desires should assist her." 

A volume could not tell more than this short paragraph. Mean- 
while the fair Goddess of Temperance is not waiting for the Third 
Party to come to the rescue but is marching steadily on to victory. I 
said a while back that when the people demand temperance legislation 
the dominant party must grant it. I also assume that while there is 
much to condemn there is something to commend in all parties. Let 
us look into the past record of the two old parties and see if there are 
not some grounds for our affiliating with either or both of them. 

Do we approve of the respective platforms of the Democratic and 
Republican parties in their entirety. No, not wholly of either. 
The Democratic party has allied itself to the whisky power by declar- 
ing against all sumptuary legislation. Do we approve of this ? No, 
but the Democratic party, like the young man, who, when told to go 



100 

to work in his father's vineyard, said "I will not," and afterward re- 
pented and went. Perhaps the old gentleman made him go. It has 
done good work for temperance in the South where it is the dominant 
party, passing stringent local option laws which insure practical pro- 
hibition in large sections of the country. Do we approve of this ? 
Yes, heartily! The first State to pass a prohibition amendment was 
Maine and it was done by a Democratic legislature. Do we approve 
of this ? Yes. A Democratic House of Representatives passed the 
scientific temperance instruction law, and it was approved by a Demo- 
cratic president. Do we approve of this ? Yes. The Democratic 
party has given to the country many eminent statesmen, jurists and 
scholars, who have been noted for the brilliancy of their attainments 
and the purity of their lives. Do we approve of them ? Yes, and 
are proud of their fame. Shall we then ally ourselves with the Dem- 
ocratic party ? No, a thousand times no ! 

The Republican party was not very emphatic in announcing its 
temperance policy. Do we approve of this half-hearted measure ? 
No. The party is accused of slandering Fisk and Brooks, especially 
Brooks. Do we approve of this ? If they falsified the facts, No ! 
"The leaders are said to be hypocrites and Pharisees, doing the devil's 
work six days in the week, going to church on the seventh/' (I quote 
from the Lever.) Do we approve of this ? No. It has passed a pro- 
hibitory amendment in five States, in two of which it is to-day in 
stringent and successful operation, and almost every session of each 
legislature — which is always Republican in these States — passes acts 
for its better enforcement. Do we approve of this ? Yes. It has 
given municipal suffrage to women in Kansas, and school suffrage to 
women in Massachusetts. Do we approve of this ? Yes. It num- 
bers in its ranks practical and consistent temperance men by the 
thousands, especially in the Northern States, and the number is con- 
stantly growing. Do we approve of this ? Yes. Should it be pro- 
posed that the TV. C. T. U. swear fealty to the Republican party 
would we approve of it ? Again no, a thousand times, no ! 

The conclusion of the whole matter is this: The TV. C. T. U. 
will not and cannot remain stationary of this question. It must either 
recede or go forward. At the last convention of the N. TV. C. T. U. 
Mrs. Campbell, of Pennsylvania — which has declared its attitude to 
be non-partisan — gave notice that she, or some one in her place, will 
offer at the next convention an amendment to article 1st, which defines 
the object of the organization making the article to read as follows : 

"Its object shall be to interest and unite the Christian women of this nation 
in non -sectarian and non-partisan temperance work, for the reformation of the 
intemperate, the education of public sentiment in favor of total abstinence, and 






101 

the prohibition of the liquor traffic, for the promotion of social purity, the sup- 
pression of vice and crime, and the education of the masses in regard to the du- 
ties and responsibility of good citizenship." 

Here is the mission of the W. C. T. U. in a nutshell. After the 
convention had re-affirmed its allegiance to the Third party, Mrs. 
Rounds, of Illinois, made the following announcement, with reference 
to one of the by-laws of the constitution : 

"I now give notice that at the next meeting of the convention I or some one 
in my place will amend the by-law in question so as to read thus : 'AH States 
auxiliary to the N. W. C. T. U. must subscribe to the constitution of the National 
Union, and both States and individuals shall be required to respect all principles 
espoused by the National Union.' Madam President, I do this that we may hold 
a logical position." 

Now the National Union of 1889 will doubtless do one of these 
things. To avoid the painful criminations and recriminations that 
prevailed at the last convention, it must make a decided stand one 
way or the other. If Mrs. Campbell's amendment carries, our organi- 
zation will be free from this Third Party incubus. If Mrs. Rounds' 
by-law carries countless individual members, as well as the two great 
States of Iowa and Pennsylvania as they now stand, must either go 
unrepresented, or their delegates must sit silent spectators while the 
National Union arrogates to itself the authority to espouse measures 
utterly obnoxious and distasteful to them. How shall it be with this 
local convention ? If we approve Mrs. Rounds' course, we owe it to 
her to say so and stand by her. If we do not we owe it to ourselves 
and to what we consider the best interests of our organization to pro- 
test against it. Meanwhile — 

1 'The mills of God grind slowly, but they grind exceeding small. 

Though with patience He stands waiting, with exactness grinds 
He all." 



102 

IOWA NOT ALONE 

"WHITE ribbon," conn. 

The statement made in the circular sent out by the National W, C. 
T. U. ' ' That all the States, save Iowa and a part of Pennsylvania, 
had declared for the Third Party in their State Conventions," is not 
correct. The following resolution was adopted by the Connecticut 
Union in the convention held last year : Resolved, l ' That we are 
unreservedly and unutterably committed to the principle of Prohibi- 
tion, State and national, and as this can only be accomplished by a 
combination of moral and political forces brought to bear at that 
point where the will of the people becomes the law of the land, we 
will lend our influence to those whose votes are cast first, last and 
always for Prohibition." Many delegates opposed this resolution, 
but were assured that it did not mean any political party, but might 
mean Republican, or Democratic Prohibitionists, as well as Third 
Party, but the tact that the word "party " was not mentioned had a 
quieting effect upon those who, for their interest in the temperance 
cause, desired peace and harmony in the ranks. Nevertheless a sub- 
stitute was offered for this resolution, and carried, that the action 
taken b} f the convention relating to the political resolution should not 
be binding on local unions or individuals. 

At the annual convention recently held in New London, Mrs. C. B. 
Buell, National Corresponding Secretary (who holds an honorary posi- 
tion in Connecticut), was Chairman of the Committee on Resolutions, 
and the word "party" was inserted in the political resolution, which 
was adopted, with nine others, as a whole. And afterward, when a 
resolution was offered by a member of the.Committee on Resolutions 
from Windham county, to the effect that we would not pledge our 
influence to any political party, but do our temperance work on a non- 
partisan plane, one of the delegates voted for it who had cast her vote 
for the first one, and said that she could not see that there was any 
material difference between the two resolutions. And when we real- 
ize that few women are familiar with parliamentary usages, and have 
been accustomed to attending religious meetings, is it surprising that 
they can be easily confused by those trained and experienced not only 
in parliamentary usage, but in political trickery. The statement was 
made in that convention that there was not a partisan union in the 
State, and it was not refuted. Miss Willard was present at the con- 
vention last year and one delegate arose and asked the question, 



10:} 

whether a delegate should Vote her own opinions or represent her 
union, and Miss Willard told her to vote her own opinions. This 
lady was President of a union that had declared itself by vote non- 
partisan in its plan of work, yet its President voted against them for 
the Third Party. 

This year Jhe same question was asked, and the State officers 
replied, in substance, the same as Miss Willard, and added : u As the 
unions knew the political standing of their delegates, they doubtless 
knew they would express them by their votes." They utterly ignored 
the fact that over one hundred of them were delegates by virtue of 
their offices as local Presidents. 

Let all the members of local unions discuss this subject freely, and 
when the County, or State or National Conventions are held, the dele- 
gates will know what they are voting for, and our unions will be 
represented. Let every union instruct the delegates they send to con- 
ventions, then the vexed question will not arise, ' ' Shall I vote my 
own opinions ?" One local President remarked, u Oh ! we never say 
anything about politics in our nnion, " and afterwards added, "We 
could not reorganize until we assured the ladies that W. C. T. U. did 
not stand for politics. " That same President voted for the Third Party 
in State Convention. White Ribbon. 



104 
IOWA NOT ALONE. 

IN HIS NAME. 
MRS. 0. E. BLAIR, LITTLE ROCK, ARK. 

Julia Ward Howe went home one night haunted by the words 
that form the beginning of the "Battle Hymn " of the war : " Mine 
eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord." These lines 
penned by a woman's hand found their way into print, and like an 
inspiration they sung their way into the hearts of thousands of men 
separated from home and loved ones by that cruel, cruel war. Little 
did the author dream of the enthusiasm that tender poem would 
awaken. She builded better than she knew, as did the W. C. T. U. 
of Iowa when they placed themselves on record as protesting against 
the political attitude assumed by the leaders of the National W. C. T. 
TJ. All honor to these brave women who have the courage to stand 
by the right. Yastly different is their heroic stand for principle from 
that taken by the Illinois W. C. T. U., which in its last State conven- 
tion passed the following resolution : 

"It is the sense of the Illinois W. C. T. TJ., that no member has 
the right from the public platform to antagonize the policy of the 
National W. G. T. U. or denounce the party to which our influence is 
pledged. " 

In pledging this influence were all the "privates'' in this vast 
white ribbon army thrown in to make good measure ? Is this resolu- 
tion confined to the State of Illinois that holds and shelters the hon- 
ored dust of Abraham Lincoln ? Or does it apply to all the sister- 
hood of other States ? If it does, by the inherent right of patriotic 
blood I boldly face the resolution and deem it no disloyalty to the 
National W. C. T. TJ. to adversely criticise its plans or policies. 
When our organization becomes an autocracy then it will be time 
enough to bridle free speech. Until then as an independent person 
I claim the right to differ with the National union and its policy, 
and to so express myself wherever and whenever I deem it best. 
With might and main I do protest against the action of the National 
W. C. T. TJ. in dragging our organization into politics. Further- 
more we are told in the Union Signal of October 11, that Mrs. 
Rounds was instructed to present a memorial to the National W. C. 
T. TJ. asking them to define what is loyalty and what is disloyalty 
to our organization. Loyalty to our organization is standing by 
its God-given principles. To thine own self be true and thou canst 



105 

not be disloyal to anyone. If our leaders will go into politics and it 
is their intention to trail our white banners of purity in the mire 
political, if these white ribbons that have meant so much, speaking- 
of unity, sympathy and harmony, these emblems of peace that have 
guided the world, are to link our broad, grand, liberal organization 
to the narrow line of a political party — then by all right, human 
and divine, let them strike out the ennobling word Christian ; let 
them not steal the livery of a saint to serve the devil. The long 
suffering Christian spirit of the women of our country finally cul- 
minated in the Crusade. As though moved by one impulse they 
arose in a body and declared this accursed traffic in strong drink 
shall be no more. The crusade prepared the way for the W. C. T. IT. 
It was conceived in prayer. The Avrongs and the sufferings, the 
prayers and the tears of long years were poured out at its birth, and 
at its christening it was stamped with the divinity of God. I have 
no fear of its success ultimately. There are women in all parts of 
this land of ours who will marshal themselves in due order to its 
defence, and above any party and any power that would stay them 
in their course. They will wave their white banner aloft, and in 
the words of Constantine on beholding the cross in the blue sky, they 
will cry: "By this sign we conquer." We arose in our helpless 
womanhood and by the might and power of God we proclaimed to all 
the world the Lord is on our side, and by His aid we will win the 
fight." And so we will, my friends. If it need be, if there be no 
other way to bring out leaders to their allegiance (and to their knees), 
then the Christian spirit of the W. C. T. U. will arise and cry aloud 
to those who are endeavoring to lead them after false gods, " Get 
thee behind me, Satan." We love the Lord and Him only will we 
serve. We are bound to no party ; our field is in the world. By 
many roads, by many strange ways and from many different by-paths, 
we have come, but in our coming we bring with us a love for ' l God 
and Home and Native Land" that rises far above all party con- 
sideration. Not of the Democratic party, not of the Republican 
party, nor yet of the Prohibition party is this host of white ribboners, 
composed, but they march in His name. 



106 

IOWA NOT ALONE. 
ON UNION THERE IS STRENGTH. 

MRS. M. K. BLAKE. OAKLAND. CAL. 
AX APPEAL TO THE MEMBEBS OF THE W. C. T. U. 

It is to be hoped "that at the next National Convention of the 
Woman's Christian Temperance Union the Association will come to- 
gether and be united heart and hand, and let no political issue separ- 
ate the well-organized society. It can no longer be a union when 
there is such a wide difference in the views and sentiments of the 
members in regard to making the organization political. History and 
observation show that there is corruption in all political parties. 
Colonel Woodford said while here that in time the Third Party might 

me corrupt. It is not wise for the Woman's Christian Temper- 
ance Union to trust itself in politics, for human nature is weak, and 
••to err is human." We do not desire to have our Union connect it- 
self with any party to become in time corrupt and useless. I think it 
is best for us to be firm in our original ideas, and keep out of politics; 
and I believe this would be the opinion of a large majority of our 
Unions if they would sit down and carefully and sensibly consider the 
matter, and let judgment decide instead of imagination, and look at 
things in a more practical light. Were it for nothing more than to 
preserve our glorious Union, we should adhere to its first noble posi- 
tion. It is heartrending to many who have been early in the work and 
borne the burden and heat of the day. and have put in their time and 
money for our blessed Woman's Christian Temperance Union, for the 
past fifteen years, to see the rupture that has been made in it. 

I feel so earnestly in the matter that I could have traveled all 
over the State to plead with the Union to beware of taking any course 
to lose any of its power, influence or respect. I could see what a 
power the Woman's Christian Temperance Union could become in the 
world, and what untold good it could do to humanity, should it con- 
tinue to move on harmoniously, and not do anything to retard its pro- 
gress or break the Union. As the convention did not want me to 
express my views there it has necessitated me to express them in this 
manner, which is intended only for good. I will again say, let us 
adhere to out first noble position. It remains now for the partisans 
to decide whether we go on united as formerly or become a broken 
band. In order to obtain national prohibition the constitution of 
the United States must be changed, and that cannot be done unless 
three-fourths of the States are in favor of it. Reform must commence 
first in the States, and this must be done by Local Option or Con- 
stitutional Prohibition. 



107 
IOWA NOT ALONE. 



Mrs. Angie F. Newman of Nebraska, is a lady of much culture 
and wide experience in Christian work. She lias been for years influ- 
ential in Woman's Missionary Work in the M. E. Church. 

For the last five years she has given almost her entire time to a 
study of the Mormon question. She has travelled up and down the 
Territory, has sat in the homes of Mormon women and heard the tales 
of sorrow from their own lips, has spent months at Washington and 
been largely instrumental in securing advanced legislalation from 
Congress and effective exercise of federal authority against the foul 
system of polygamy which has disgraced the social and demoralized 
the political condition of Utah and been a shame to the Republic. 

Her recent great enterprise is the securing of an appropriation 
from Congress for a home for Mormon women who have been released 
from the agonies of polygamous marriage and thus become social out- 
casts and homeless wanderers. 

Her indefatigable labors, her power of expression with the pen 
and her eloquence on the platform have made her mighty to the pull- 
ing down of the strong holds of Satan. She was from the first, con- 
nected with the W. C. T. U. of Nebraska, but was called by Miss Wil- 
lard into the National work, and made Superintendent of the Depart- 
ment of Work among Mormon women. She has lately resigned her 
Superintendency. 

The following letter is from her pen. 

Lincoln, Nebraska. 
Mrs. M. J. Aldrich, 

Dear Sister : 

* * * I have always voted the Third Party until the last 
Convention. I then voted against the Third Party resolution — not 
because of the Third Party — or any other party. But because I saw 
in the political attitude of the National Union an increasing cause for 
dissension, an increasing divergence from the primal purpose of our 
organization — 1st. Christian, — 2d. Temperance work. 

I felt and still feel unity as most essential in the great organiza- 
tion. I believe in the u Union, now and forever, one and insepar- 
able." I believe we ought as an entire country to present a solid 
front to the enemy. That we ought not to be in battle array within 
our ranks, and it seemed to me, looking at the question from the 
stand point of the sentiment of the last Convention, that it had been 
a mistaken policy to declare in favor of any party, and the surest way 



108 

to secure harmony, would be to suspend the policy, and leave every 
woman, every Union, every State to its own conviction as to politics. 
We are not, cannot be a political organization, as we are not voters. 
Hence I expressed my conviction by ballot as against the perpetuity 
of a political affiliation with any party. 

I did not vote against "Miss Willard," nor against "St John 
nor the " Third Party as a whole." I have always believed in Miss 
Willard. I do still. I think she has erred in some things— not she 
alone, but the National Union as an entirety as evinced by the 
sequence of things, — and my thought only was to turn my individual 
influence against the causes which led to such sequences. 

I believed that liberty of action to every individual, every Union, 
every State, was essential to harmony and harmony essential to 
strength, and solidity of more value to us than a political pledge. 

I am — I always have been for many years, a firm friend of J. 
Ellen Foster. That friendship has "never wavered. But just as I 
believe, Mrs. Foster and the Iowa women have a right to think and 
act on political matters as their judgment determines, so I accord 
that same liberty to every one else. 

I have never entered this political controversy. My work in the 
W. C. T. U. has always been on the original and uncontroverted lines 
of action for the National and State — viz — " Christian, Temperance." 
I have entered into no attack upon party or individual. I never have 
spoken, especially on the political question but on topics above men- 
tioned. I have neither health nor disposition to do so now.- I am in 
my own State, Yice-President of the non-partisan League to work for 
the Amendment. We have Republicans, Democrats and Third Party, 
all pledged to silence our party issues, but voice the Amendment sol- 
idly. 

I believe if as States and as a National Union we push our 
Department work — in the gradual evolution of things, the political 
question will settle itself and we settle our relation to it — by individ- 
ual action. 

I would give credit to Senator Blair and all other noble 
men who have endorsed him, for what he has done in Republican 
ranks — to Senator Colquitt and his adherents in the Democratic 
ranks — in a word, I would work for a common purpose — namely, 
Prohibition, with all men and all women. If we can't agree as to 
method, let us each use our own tools, but hew for the same founda- 
tion and superstructure. 

My vote in the last National Convention is not to be interpreted 
as a faction vote — nor yet a party vote — but simply as I have said, 
a vote for the discontinuance of a political policy — the effect of that 






109 

policy upon the organization — I believed Aad been to provoke dis- 
cord — to open chasms — I would cease the strife and as individuals, in 
all the future, act as conscience should dictate under the coming rays 
of light. I would preserve the Union : 

In this discussion, at least you will credit me with honorable 
action. You can make such use of this letter as you choose. 

Yours in sincerest friendship, 

Angie F. Newman. 



! 



110 



IOWA NOT ALONE. 

MAINE. 

Mrs. Florence Porter, for years a leading temperance woman and 
wife of a Congregational pastor, writes: l; Many of the unions In 
Maine claim to be non-partisan ; except at election times little discus- 
sion is had on the controverted questions." 

Aroostook County has made open and vigorous protest, and pub- 
lished the following formal declaration : " Believing that the time has 
come in the history of our State and N. W. C. T. U. when a decided 
stand should be taken against its partisanship, we, the undersigned, 
with the deepest regret for the severing of the ties that have bound us 
together, withdraw for the purpose of forming a non-partisan union." 

The "Y V of the county have been more fortunate in avoiding 
the dissension and strife which have perplexed the older organiza- 
tions. 

The State Secretary sent out an official inquiry as to their 
u attitude on the political question."' This set the U Y s " to defining 
their attitude and they soon decided not to become auxiliary to the 
State. Other organizations have been formed which are non-partisan 
and non-auxiliary. 

This county — Aroostook — has been perplexed by a State organi- 
zer who aroused disaffection by challenging the right of the non- 
partisans to use the name W. C. T. U. and to carry on its regular 
lines of work. 

The controversy should not be a reflection upon the Christian 
spirit of the participants for disputations are not necessarily involved 
in the discussion of the issue between the minority and the majority. 
Because of the expression of opinions contrary to those of others, 
reforms have come in the past and are apt to come in the future. The 
cause of the controversy is widely known. It is not a simple difference 
of opinion relating especially to the organization itself. The TV. C. 
T. U. has made its political work a national question, and through it 
seeks to do a national work. Therefore a discussion of the wisdom or 
expediency of its policy by its own members and those interested in 
moral reforms, is perfectly proper and justifiable. 

Minorities and majorities always existin large corporative bodies 
and the rule of the majority is the just one on which our Republican 
form of government rests, but the claims of the minority should ever 
be respected. The W. C. T. XI. is inconsistent in its relations toward 
the minority. If its premises are correct it should boldly avow that 



Ill 

party politics is the fundamental law of its organization and expect 
from its followers a faithful adherence to its political teachings. 
Members could not then be placed in the anomalous position they now 
occupy, because in joining they would accede to, if not believe in ita 
conditions of membership. 

To say that the sole work of the W. C. T. XJ. is political, is unjust, 
for many wise reforms and needed charities arc carried on by its man- 
ifold departments ; but before the election the General Officers and 
some of the late presidents, together with members of the different 
unions, were actively engaged as speakers in the campaign, carrying 
the influence of the organization with them and giving to it a political 
character not hitherto assumed. 

There are many who say in their hearts, " I wish the W. C. T. U. 
had never touched politics " and yet vote for these resolutions or allow 
them to pass without opposition. Others have allowed the theoretical 
rather than the practical side of the question to influence them. The 
speakers and leaders at all the large conventions are advocates of 
party prohibition and an argument is hardly ever heard from non- 
partisan side for lack of somebody to present it. Under such condi- 
tions there is no need for the manifesto that "the minority is steadily 
decreasing." It cannot be otherwise under such a regime. 

The minority does not question the honesty of the opinions of the 
majority, but it does feel that a spirit of intolerance prevails toward 
the opinions of the minority at variance with the "Gospel of Sweet 
Reasonableness." 



112 



IOWA NOT ALONE. 



MASSACHUSETTS. 

It is reported from the headquarters of the Woman's Christian 
Temperance Union of Massachusetts "that in point of fact there are 
but six partisan unions in the State." This number would hardly 
justify the statement that ' l we are practically solid for the Third 
party." Some unions in the State make vigorous protest against the 
committal of the Union by the State officers and by delegates in 
National Convention. Many also have passed non-partisan resolu- 
tions. The union at South Framingham adopted the following : 

Resolved, That upon such questions as party affiliation, woman's suffrage, 
Mormonism, socialism, and other more or less remotely related questions we do 
not declare ourselves, our unity in distinctive temperance work for which we 
were organized being of more consequence than any possible success in attempt- 
ing to cover ground that is likely to result in the confusion and disintegration of 
our noble organization. 

Resolved, That the insinuation in a recently published circular from our 
Woman's Christian Temperance headquarters that the women who are not parti- 
sans or suffragists are ignorant of great questions at issue is altogether unworthy 
of its authors and unjust to others. 

BROOKLINE W. C. T. U. 

The following protest has been unanimously adopted at a meeting specially 
called to consider the relations of the local Union to the Prohibition party and to the 
subject of Woman Suffrage 

The Woman's Christian Temperance Union of Brookline hereby protests against 
the action of the State Union at its last annual convention, whereby we — as an 
auxiliary— stand pledged to ** loyalty to the Prohibition party in the State and 
nation," and also are pledged " to ask for full municipal suffrage for women." 

We believe that the best and most permanent results of any efforts that we may 
make for the cause of temperance can be accomplished by adhering strictly to a 
non-partisan and non-sectarian basis, and while allowing full liberty of individual 
opinion, we do not believe that as a Union we should be pledged to promote Woman 
Suffrage. 

We therefore send respectful word to our State organization that, although 
still an auxiliary to it, we shall not assist in furthering these ends, either by 
personal effort or by contributions of money. 

Mrs. Jerome W. Tyler, President, 
Mrs. David Hall Rice, Secretary. 



NATICK W. C. T. U. 

While we do not think it wise at present to sever our connection with the 
State Union, we most earnestly and decidedly protest against the action of that 
organization, at its annual convention, in committing itself and so its auxiliaries 
"to loyalty to the Prohibition party in the State and nation." 

Neither do we believe that as a Union we should be pledged to promote Woman 
Suffrage. We believe we can accomplish most for the temperance cause by 
adhering strictly to the non-partisan and non-sectarian basis required by our 
constitution on which we have worked in the past, and thus allowing full liberty 
of individual opinion. 

Mary A. Peloubet, 
Emma W. Hoyt, 

M. ESTELLA SWEETLAND. 



113 



IRREGULAR AND ILLEGAL PROCEEDINGS. 

MRS. FLORENCE MILLER, IOWA. 

The records of the National Executive Committee held in New 
York city on the evening of October 20th 1888, present this fact; — 
The Secretary presented Memorials from the First, Fourth and Eighth 
Districts of Iowa, and others from individuals also from the same 
State." Further u facts in the case " prove that an answer to these 
Memorials was prepared by the Executive Committee, read to the 
Convention on the evening of the 23d and adopted by that body. 

In consideration of these facts the first question which arises is, 
how came district and individual Memorials before the National 
Executive Committee ? Were they legally before that body ? Had they 
been presented to the Convention through any legalized channel ? 
Were they referred to the Executive Committee by the Convention ? 
Had the Convention any authorized knowledge of their existence ? 
How do Memorials and Petitions come before legislative bodies ? 

Petitions and Memorials are presented to legislative bodies by 
members of those bodies. Usually and legitimately through the 
delegation, or members, most directly related to the petitioner. If by 
any outrageous or anomalous condition of affairs this channel is closed 
to a petitioner, the President of the United States may be the 
bearer of a petition to Congress, the Governor of a State to a 
Legislature, or a President of any organization ; all of these 
however must submit the petition to the body from which action must . 
emanate. There were no Memorials presented to the New York 
Convention except that from the Iowa Union. The Minutes of that 
Convention make no record of the presentation of any other Memorials.. 

The Minutes of the Executive Committee show that Mrs. Rounds 
of Illinois presented and read to that body, a Memorial from that 
State, but no Memorial from Illinois was referred to the Executive 
Committee by the Convention. The Memorials said to be from the 
First, Fourth and Eighth Districts, and from individuals in Iowa, 
were not presented to the Convention by any member of the Iowa 
delegation, the only regular and recognized channel through which 
they could come before that body for disposition. 

A motion was carried that all Memorials should be referred 
without reading to the Executive Committee, but the Iowa Memorial 
was the only one presented to the Convention and referred under that 



114 

rule. *The legitimate authorized presentation of the Illinois Memorial to 
the New York Convention was that it be presented by the Illinois 
delegation, and that fact and its reference to the Executive Committee 
would have then been matter of Convention record. The Memorials 
from individuals in Iowa should at least have been presented to the 
Convention by the Secretary of the Executive Committee, and on 
motion of a delegate, or by order of the Chair under rula adopted by 
the Convention, have been given formally and legally into the hands of 
the Committee. 

All action of the Executive Committee and the Convention upon 
all Memorials save upon that of the Iowa State Union, was irregular 
and illegal. 

The Convention could not refer to the Executive Committee that 
which it did not possess, that which was never in its hands. The 
Memorials from Illinois and from the Iowa women were never in the 
hands of the Convention. The Executive Committee could not act for 
the Convention upon matters the Convention had never committed to 
it. and these Memorials were never put into the hands of the Committee 
by the Convention. True the motion to refer Memorials to the 
Executive Committee without reading was adopted, and that before 
any Memorial had been presented. — but that motion did not put 
Memorials into the possession of the Convention, it only provided for 
their disposition when they should come into its] - -ion. 

The Executive Committee also transcended its powers when it 
formulated replies to the Memorials ; the Convention did not del* a 
to it the work or duty, of preparing its answer to Auxiliary States, or 
individual petitioners. Having no knowledge of the existence of such 
Memorials it could not authorize replies. 

The motion to refer to the Committee all Memorials, did not hint 
at any action of the Committee in regard to them. It may be claimed 
the Memorials from Iowa women were addressed to the Executive 
Committee, and that therefore that body had power to hold and to 
reply to them. If this were true the reply should not have been 
submitted to the Convention for approval, thus becoming a Convention 
reply to a Committee matter. Either the Committee was guilty of 
usurpation of power in doing a thing that belonged to Convention or 
the Convention recorded its interference with Committee rights in its 
vote on the replies. 

The Committee arrogated to itself the power to consider the 
Memorials which found their way into its hands through irregular and 
illegal channels, and the power to formulate replies to both these and 
the Iowa Memorial without the shadow of instruction from the 
Convention to make such reply. 



115 

It also assumed the power to hold in its possession the Memorials 
from Illinois and the Iowa women, and the Convention had no 
knowledge of their existence or substance, except through outside 
rumor, until ten o'clock on the evening of adjournment ; at which time 
they were read on demand of the Iowa delegation ; after which they 
were distributed to delegates on printed sheets which also contained 
the replies of the Committee. This was at so late an hour they could 
not be read by delegates, even had the light of the hall been sufficient 
for reading purposes ; so that the vote was taken upon the replies to 
these Memorials when delegates had had no opportunity to read either 
Memorials or replies and have an intelligent opinion on the questions 
involved. 

Discussion was summarily prevented by the action of the Chair in 
putting the question to vote with undue haste, while a delegate held 
the floor demanding recognition. The right of petition is most sacred 
and important. The character of the Memorials under consideration 
has nothing to do with the facts and issues involved in this particular 
discussion. 

The irregularity and illegality of proceedings is the thing pointed 
out and complained of. Assumption of power by the Executive 
Committee is a dangerous and demoralizing element in the delibera- 
tions, conclusions and results of Convention action. 

The Committee is the servant of the Convention, not its master 
or director. It is the business committee of the Convention, but no 
business is legally before it unless committed to it by the Convention. 
Matters of business which lie legitimately in its domain for presentation 
to the Convention are to be laid before the Convention as business to 
be disposed of by that body, rather than business which has been con- 
sidered and passed upon by the committee, and their final action only 
presented for approval or reflection by the Convention. 

The arbitrary, unparliamentary and illegal proceedings of the 
New York Convention in the matter of the Memorials, is not merely a 
technicality but involves unjust dealing with the constituency these 
represented and should be fearlessly and courageously considered for 
the future good of the organization. 

It is duty to stand in times like these against organization 
allegiance that is wrong in principle, and against assumption of 
power. It it duty to speak. In the fear of God, in kindly word, with 
christian forbearance let it be done, but let no woman shrink from the 
responsibility of the times, or fail to let the light of truth shine forth. 



116 



THE DISTRESSES OF PARTY ALLIANCE. 

MRS. J. ELLEN FOSTER, IOWA. 

The distresses to which the partisan alliance of the National So- 
ciety ha3 driven the organization are painfully manifest in the general 
conduct of its affairs. 

Measures have been resorted to, which among men in business 
might be judged bad faith, and in organizations not distinctively 
Christian, might be condemned as tainted with craftiness or actual 
dishonesty. We do not make this charge; we set forth facts and ask 
Christian women to inquire into the relation of these facts to stand- 
ards of absolute rectitude. 

We ask them to pray for a clarified vision which shall reveal the 
effect of these doubtful measures upon the future of the work. Can 
we expect the blessing of Heaven unless the work of our hands will 
bear the test of probity and Christian courtesy ? 

Xote the following discrepancies and ambiguities. An Annual 
Leaflet is published by the N. W. C. T. U. The title page of the last 
issue reads — 

THE 

NATIONAL WOMAN'S 

CHRISTIAN TEMPERANCE UNION. 

WHAT IS IT ? WHY IS IT ? 

WHO ARE ITS LEADERS ? 

HOW DOES IT WORK 5 



ANNUAL LEAFLET. 
1889. 

This little leaflet purports to set forth the work of the X. W. C. 
T. U. and it does so, clearly and in full outline — except that no refer- 
ence whatever is made to the political work of the Society.. 

A stranger would naturally suppose the Union did no party work, 
since none is referred to. What else could be supposed if the little 
summary is accepted in good faith as being what it claims to be, an 
honest setting forth of the work to ivhich the public is asked to con- 
tribute. 

Miss Willard says ' ; party politics" is the "chief weapon of our 
warfare." She savs it is a -vital issue." Then why do the General 



117 • 

Officers in this official leaflet omit all reference to this among other 
lines of work ? 

Is it honest ? Can it be possible they wish to keep the public in 
ignorance, lest its faith would be shaken, and its benefactions of ser- 
vice and of money be lessened ? 

Might not a conscientious Temperance Republican, who gave 
money to the Fnion under the supposition that its General Officers 
had giv*m a full and fair summary of the Society's work, consider 
himself duped, when at the next election those same ladies whose 
work he had helped, officially entered the arena of political action" 
with the avowed purpose of destroying the party which he believed 
conserves the best interests of temperance and other politico-moral 
questions ? Might not he call it bad faith ? 

Take another case — a minister is approached by a committee of 
W. C. T. TJ. women who desire the use of his pulpit, for a public 
meeting, to be addressed by an accredited representative of the so- 
ciety. 

The minister very properly inquires of the ladies of the nature of 
the proposed meeting, of the Society's work, etc. 

The ladies tell of the good already done, and contemplated in 
the future, and they leave with him the Annual Leaflet as an official 
statement. The church is given, the meeting is announced as a 
" temperance meeting " from the pulpit and press, the speaker ar- 
rives, the congregation assembles, the minister extends all pulpit 
courtesies ; the lecture contains much admirable presentation of tem- 
perance truth ; but it also contains denunciations of political parties 
and partisans, and of measures advocated by the minister and mem- 
bers of the congregation whose guests the Society and the speaker 
are. Is it right thus to abuse the courtesy of a minister and a con- 
gregation ? Is it right ever to accept a courtesy secured through 
guile ? 

The Leaflet under review is one of many illustrations of the sup- 
pression of the truth in regard to our work ; such suppression is not 
consistent with perfect honor. 

Again — There is a carelessness in the preparation of official 
statements which in law might be prosecuted under the head of ma- 
licious mischief or criminal negligence. 

It has been repeatedly stated that Mrs. Foster was a member of 
the Resolutions Committee at the Louisville Convention. It is not 
true, as the minutes bear record. 

Also, that Mrs. Foster made certain statements at the Conven- 
tion. These statements were made, but Mrs. Foster did not make 
them. In some instances these mistakes are trivial, in others they 
are prejudicial to the truth under controversy. 



118 

One startling inaccuracy appears in the official Minutes of the 
New York Convention. The Rounds Amendment, which should be 
before the next Convention for action — as given in the records of 
that Convention, reads — 

" Mrs. Rounds — I wish (then) to give notice and I give this notice so that we 
may be in harmony with the action we have just taken on Resolution No. 7, and 
I read the By-Laws, Article 8, Section 2, 'No State Union,' etc, 

I now give notice that I or some one in my place will, at the next Annual 
Convention, move that the first clause of the By-Law be stricken out, and that 
the By-Law shall read : 

" All States auxiliary to the National W. C. T. U. must subscribe to the Con- 
stitution of the National Union, and both States and individuals shall be required 
to respect all principles espoused by the National Union. " 

Madam President, I do this that we may hold a logical position." 

In the official Minutes this same amendment reads : 

"I now give notice that at the next annual meeting, I, or some one in my 
place, will move that the first clause of Sec. 2, Art. VIII of the By-Laws be 
stricken out, and that the By-Laws shall read : "All State auxiliaries must sub- 
scribe to the total abstinence pledge and to the Constitution of the National 
Union." 

What has become of the part which contains all that about 
which there is any division of opinion, viz — 

" And all States and individuals shall be required to respect all principles 
espoused by the National Union. " 

Did the Recording Secretary knowingly leave out that which 
would arrest attention and prove the truth of the minorities' declar- 
ation, that the loyalty ' 'whip" will be applied as soon as considered 
"wise?" 

The amendment as given in the report as prepared by the 
official stenographer appeared in the Daily Union Signal. There 
can be no question as to its correctness. 

But the Minutes will be the record received by the next Annual 
Meeting, (Chicago, Nov. 1889). The Minutes will fail to show the 
amendment as offered by Mrs. Rounds, and will sustain Miss Willard 
in ruling that there is no "loyalty test" amendment before the Con- 
vention for action. 

If such a mutilation of public records were made by an officer of 
the government it would merit and receive public and judicial con- 
demnation. 

We charge no one with wrong intent. We do not understand 
who is responsible for this serious error. 

Mrs. Rounds made a brave attempt to have the National Union 
give an honest straight-forward declaration of a policy which is the 
logical result of its party action, and which has been its unwritten 
but vital law for nearly five years. 



119 

Will Mrs. Rounds submit to have her attempt smothered be- 
tween the pillows of timid expediency and dexterous manipulation 
of records ? 

Again — The Woman's Christian Temperance Union of Iowa, at 
its annual meeting next preceding the National Convention at New 
York, adopted "a solemn Memorial to the National Union, setting 
forth its* reasons for opposing the Alliance of the Union with a politi- 
cal party. 

The Memorial was intrusted to the delegation of that Convention 
to be by the President presented to the Convention to which it was 
addressed. 

After the action on the first day of the Convention by which its 
reading was forbidden, it was presented in due form by Mrs. Foster. 
The record in the Minutes is — pages 28 and 29 . 

(i Mrs. Foster arose and said : Madam President, I rise to a question of 
privilege. I hold in my hand a Memorial addressed to this body. It is en- 
titled— 

MEMORIAL OF 

The Fifteenth Annual meeting of the Woman's Christian Temperance Union 
of Iowa, in session at Des Moines, October 2-5, '88 to the annual meeting of the 
National Woman's Christian Temperance Union to be held in New York City, 
October 19-23, '88 — Greeting; 

This Convention yesterday voted that protests and petitions should be re- 
fered to the Executive Committee without reading. I am therefore compelled to 
present this paper which bears the greeting of the loyal W. C. T. U. women of 
an Auxiliary State Union. 

The Iowa Woman's Christian Temperance Union has complied with the let- 
ter and the spirit of every constitutional requirement of pledges and Christian 
effort and membership dues. On behalf of these women and this State Union, 
I present to the Convention, through the Secretary, this Memorial which you 
have declared voiceless. 

J. Ellen Foster, 
President Iowa N. W. C. T. U. 

Although the right of petition was thus denied, we knew that its 
formal presentation would secure for it a place in the official records of 
the Society, and not until some weeks later, when the official Minutes 
appeared, did we discover that the State Union of Iowa was 
subject to the further discourtesy of exclusion from official records. 

It does not anywhere appear in the official Minutes of the Con- 
vention. Messages involving the mere passing courtesies of the hour 
find place, but this one is conspicuous by its absence. 

Who has authority to determine what part of the proceedings 
the W. C. T. U. Convention shall find their place in the Minutes ' 
what part be excluded ? 

Is there any such authority except the Convention itse v 
took no such action — the responsibility rests elsewhere. 



120 

Neither is it any excuse to answer that the Memorial from Illi- 
nois was also excluded. It is naturally suggested by those acquainted 
with the contents ol the Illinois Memorial, that it would have afforded 
abundant evidence of the truth of the claims of non-partisans that 
the " loyalty test" is now in practical operation; that when the 
"wise" time arrives it will be made part of the written as it is now 
of the unwritten law. 

The Illinois statement of the case is full and clear and in that 
regard commands respect. 

The answers of the sub-committee (Miss Willard, Mrs. Hoffman 
and Mrs. Lathrop) of the Executive Committee are in matter and 
style significant — the short brusque denial and arrogant condescen- 
sion which marks the answer to Iowa, is in marked contrast with the 
spirit of sympathetic comradeship which beams from the long reply 
to the one making the loyalty test from Illinois. 

On page 38 of the Minutes is given the record of the vote by 
which Miss Willard was re-elected President ; the first motion follow- 
ing was by Mrs. Foster who "moved that the informal be made the 
formal ballot of the Convention and Miss Willard be declared 
President for the ensuing year." 

The motion was carried, but the usual courtesy of including some 
leader of the opposition in the committee to introduce the newly 
elected officer was denied Mrs. Foster, although she had made the 
motion to make the informal the formal ballot. 

Were the ladies ignorant of this common courtesy in such 
cases, or were they determined to make the controversy conspicuously 
personal ? 

It is pitiful that this controversy has been so personal in its char- 
acter ; those who differ with Miss Willard and say so are charged 
with personal ambition, with a desire to "break her down." to 
destroy the W. C. T. U.," etc, and partisan leaders have defended the 
action of the Society by reiterating that it was led to take such action 
by the teachings of Mrs. Foster. Quotations from her reports and 
addresses have been given in the attempt to show that she once 
believed in the " third party " and advocated the endorsement of it 
by the W. C. T. U. 

It would be pertinent to inquire if there are no stronger, broader 
grounds of defense for this party alliance than that some woman once 
loved and trusted by the leaders in the W. C. T. U. had led them to 
that position ? 

Is the policy of the W. C. T. U. on so "vital an issue" to be 
determined by personal leadership ? Is this sufficient reason for the 
hope that is in us ? 



121 

Miss Willard states that not one dollar from the treasury of the 
N. W, C. T. U. has ever gone for party purposes, and that the books 
of the Treasurer sustain this statement ; to which we reply, it was 
never claimed to our knowledge that money from the National Treas- 
ury had been directly appropriated to u third party " work, but we 
do claim and reaffirm that the National Officers whose salaries are 
paid from the National Treasury, do serve the "third party," they do 
spend their time in its service. The officers of the N. W. C. T. IT. are 
competent, accomplished women, and receive proper remuneration 
for their services ; they are assisted by a corps of clerks who are also 
paid from the National Treasury. They are not paid one dollar too 
much ; their salaries are their own, but their time belongs to the 
Union. Their service of the Prohibition party is a logical result of 
the society alliance to the Prohibition party ; and women of the local 
unions have no remedy, they are compelled to support the party by 
their financial contributions to the W. C. T. IT. 

It is stated and restated that no State Union or individual mem- 
ber is bound by the policy of the National Society, but the National 
Convention declared that Iowa coerced the convictions of her Prohi- 
bition party women by adding a non-partisan clause to the Constitu- 
tion of the State Society. 

If a mere negative statement which forbids the endorsement by 
the W. C. T. U. of any political party is coercion, what must be the 
coercion of the National Society toward Republican, Democratic or 
Union Labor Party Women whose united influence is pledged and 
whose money is used in support of the "third party." 

Further, Mrs. Rounds, President of the Illinois W. C. T. U., 
writing from Headquarters W. C. T. U., Chicago, 111., September 21, 
1888, says of the Secretary of the Whiteside County Union in that 
State, "lam sorry that Mrs. Mallory has chosen to repudiate, the 
party to which the W. C. T. U. promised to lend its influence. If 
she is making speeches in the interest of either old party, I shall con- 
sider that she has forfeited her claim to membership in our Society, 
and shall be obliged to so punish her " ! ! ! This utterance was made 
in the State of Illinois, United States of America, in the year of our 
Lord, 1888. It was not a decree of the Pope of Rome, or 
of a Mormon Bishop, but of the President of a Woman's Christian 
organization, and concerning a member of that organization, who as 
a free American citizen had spoken her convictions on current politi- 
cal questions ! Only those who have known by contact and co-opera- 
tion the growth and work of the Woman's Temperance movement can 
understand how such a preposterous assertion could be intelligently 
and conscientiously made ! It has been well said, "Much unwise 



122 

action is caused by the forceful conviction that something must be 
done." 

The personal sorrow and sympathy with sorrow, the religious 
fervor, the patriotic desire of American women have agonized for 
deliverance from the drink curse ; thus hundreds have been ready 
converts to a false theory of political action, and hundreds more only 
half persuaded of the wisdom of that action have yielded to the sweet 
coercion of personal devotion, and the insidious and sometimes uncon- 
scious influence of numbers in an organization about which holy associa- 
tions cluster. Party politics having been espoused " for better or for 
worse" there is a sort of grim heroism in Mrs. Rounds's unflinching 
loyalty to the logical sequence of that espousal. 

In a leaflet published by the Illinois W. C. T. TL, entitled "What 
Answer" Mrs. Rounds addresses " Tothe White-Ribboners of Illinois, 
and all others concerned/' She refers to the current controversy in 
the W. C. T. TJ. on political action, gives Resolutions of the last 
annual convention 1 of the Illinois W. C. T. XL, the Memorial of the 
same convention to the National Convention, and the reply of the 
National Convention to it. 

She sketches the growth of conviction in the Society which has 
led to present positions. It is a strong, plain, out-spoken defense of 
the partisan position of the National Union. There are no equivoca- 
tions, no ambiguous phrases, no reversible adjustible clauses. Such 
honest and bold championship commands the respect of those who 
utterly repudiate the positions taken and the conclusions reached. 

Among other things Mrs. Rounds says : 

" Has the W. C. T. U., which is not a political organization and which, in 
the nature of the case cannot be, a political policy ? If so, how came it by that 
policy? And what is our duty concerning it, and what is loyalty and what is dis- 
loyalty toward it? 

To all these questions what answer ? Every question at all worthy our con- 
sideration, ought and must be settled upon its merits. This cannot be done 
until we put away all prejudice, and, regardless alike of friend or foe, seek to 
know the truth. To the first question, Has the W. C. T. U. a policy ? I answer 
emphatically, Yes !" 

Again — 

"But is this policy of our great National organization the policy of the sev- 
eral States composing the National ? 'Aye, there's the rub.' We are told that 
States and individuals are left free ; free for what ? Free to accept or reject this 
pledged position of the National body — free to antagonize it, free to use influence 
against as well as for the Prohibitory party. Could anything be more absurd or 
illogical ? What then is our duty ? Manifestly either to retreat, go back to non- 
partisan ground, withdraw our influence from the Prohibition party and lend it 
to none — or go on to the only logical and happy conclusion and make the policy 
of the National the policy of the States. But will we go back? 



123 

Hear what the National says : " It cannot and will not recede from the posi- 
tion it has conscientiously taken." Brave words. 

It will not because it cannot; the bridges are burned behind us. 

Will we go on ? That remains to be seen. The swift and unerring logic of 
events will bring us, ere long, gladly or reluctantly, to a decision." 

Among the resolutions adopted by the last Convention of the 
State Union of Illinois, were the following: 

"Whereas, Individual membership in the \V. C. T. U. has never been, and 
is not, based upon the holding of certain political views, and, whereas, the indi- 
vidual member is accorded perfect freedom of private opinion and private ut- 
terance of same, we nevertheless recognize the fact that the action of the Nat- 
ional W. C. T. U. in promising, by a large majority vote, to "lend its influence 
to that party by whatever named called, which would give the best embodiment 
of Prohibition principles and would most surely protect the home," gives to our 
organization a political policy which each member is in honor bound to respect; 
therefore, 

Resolved, That it is the sense of the Illinois W. C. T. U. that no member has 
the right from the public platform, to antagonize that policy or denounce the 
party to which our influence is given. 

Resolved, That any member thus antagonizing our policy becomes thereby 
disloyal to our organization and is no longer entitled to wear our badge. 

VI. 

Resolved, That we present to the National W. C. T. U. Convention a Me- 
morial asking that body to define what is loyalty and disloyalty to our organiza- 
tion, and that Mrs. Rounds be asked to prepare and present such a Memorial." 

TTe call attention to the 5th Resolution, which permits " perfect 
freedom of private opinion and private utterance of the same ; " but 
this freedom does not extend to the '''public platform." 

Do the temperance women of Illinois really wish to stand before 
the country as approving such an attempted assault upon free speech? 
The imbecility of the assault does not redeem its real inwardness. 

If it is right to have private opinions on political questions which 
are contrary to the edicts of the National Society, is it not right that 
they shall be expressed at the option of the individual citizen who 
holds such opinions ? 

Since the days of Daniel who might worship the God of Israel in 
private, but must not, according to royal decree, open his windows 
toward Jerusalem, was ever intolerance more arrogant, or corporate 
power more magisterial ? 

But on the other hand, if it were right for the N. W. C. T. U. to 
promise to lend the influence of the body to a party, ought any indi- 
vidual whose influence is thus mortgaged, to resist the delivery of 
that influence or to dare to ''lend influence " to any other party ? 

Do not these conflicting claims show that the N. W. C. T. U. had 
itself no clear title to the political influence of individual members 



124 

which it could convey at its own option ? Can it lend u aggregate 
influence " without lending individual influence ? 

Mrs. Rounds asks, ' ' What is duty — to go back to non-partisan 
grounds, withdraw our influence from the Prohibition party, and to 
lend it to none, or to go on * * * and make the policy of the 
National the policy of the States ? " Brave woman, that she dares 
set her face thus boldly to a thorough solution of the question ! She 
would have the present partisan policy of the National Union obliga- 
tory on the States and on individual members of local unions ! 

Iowa and hundreds of women in Illinois and other States would 
have the Society retake its former crusade position. We would have 
it go up higher than partisan limitations now permit ; we would have 
it a great moral power over .all parties, generating force which in 
popular governments is applied through many political agencies, and 
which continually makes for righteousness. 

It is impossible to hold the W. C. T. U., a united mighty force 
for righteousness if positions are taken which will not bear discussion, 
or lines of work are adopted about which there is, and must continue 
to be diversity of opinion and -condition. It is better to be wholly 
united on a few lines than to weaken that unity by introducing doubt- 
ful measures. 

The temperance women of the Southern States are many of them 
troubled that the National Society has endorsed Woman Suffrage, and 
that so many of the States are working along these lines. 

These Southern .sisters, true to the very soul to prohibition, and 
heroic in their attempt to build up the Woman's Christian Temperance 
Union in their beloved "South land" are obliged often to assure their 
conservative friends that States and individuals are quite free to 
adopt or reject any line of work proposed by the National Society. 

The Alabama Union has been pressed at this point. 

In the official Minutes for 1888 this record is made of questions 
asked Miss Pugh, the honored and trusted Treasurer of the National 
Union. Miss Pugh was at the Convention at Miss Willard's request 
and as her representative : 

"Should it be regarded as an evidence of disloyalty if a State or local Union 
should not endorse every position taken by the N. W. C. T. U. ? " In answer to 
this, Miss Pugh replied substantially as follows : 

" No, emphatically no ! The N. \V. C. T. U. makes but two requirements of 
its members, viz.: The signing of the total abstinence pledge and the payment of 
dues. Each State takes the lines of work suited to its condition; each local union 
takes those suited to its environments. No State takes all the lines of the National, 
much less any union all those of its State. 



11 East, West, North, and South have so many interests that it would be impos- 
sible to run us into one mould. Still with this wide liberty we should not consider 



125 

ourselves free to criticize adversely in public, methods adopted by the National. Nor 
must you here think that the N, W. C. T. unions are working for suffrage. J do 
not know of one that is so doing. We are trying to educate the people with literature, 
etc., but no State is making any special effort to secure suffrage for women. 

" In view of this pledge each local president and member is requested to 
work faithfully to secure as many subscribers as possible in her town and union." 

Is it true then that no State at the North is making any special 
effort to secure suffrage for women ? Call the roll of the States and 
let them answer. 

Read Miss Willard's addresses ! Read the reports from the 
States ! Read the columns of the Union Signal ! Read the appeals 
of Rev. Anna Straw, Superintendent of Franchise — read or hear the 
argument of Mrs. Wallace — they seem the echoes of Holy Writ. 
Alter all this, read Miss Pugh's statement that no State is making 
•• any special effort to secure suffrage for women " and realize to what 
straits we have come in the attempt of the National Union to compass 
the whole field of philanthropic and reformatory and political 
work. 

Again in these same Alabama Minutes we read Miss Pugh's 
words that W. C. T. U. women are u not at liberty to criticize 
adversely in public methods adopted by the National.'" 

Must women not speak against Woman Suffrage, even if they 
believe it not a step toward righteousness in government ! Must 
Republican and Democratic women say no word adverse to the Third 
Party, although they believe — guided by the light of philosophy and 
experience — that the Third Party is a dangerous political factor in 
temperance reform and in general National welfare. 

Where is the right of free speech for which our father's con- 
tended ? Shades of Mt. Vernon and of Bunker Hill, protect us ! 

It is often claimed that by the party alliance of the W. C. T. U. 
the North and South have been brought into closer union ; that 
women have clasped hands over the once bloody chasm, etc., but the 
fact remains that the W. C. T. TJ. has repeatedly refused to wipe out 
the sectional line. It has its "Superintendent of Southern Work," 
which is wholly anomalous in our plan of organization. 

When the South was missionary ground and Mrs. Sallie F. Chapin 
the accomplished pioneer of the work there, was careful lest the radi- 
calism of the North might startle Southern conservatism, a Southern 
superintendence might be excused as a temporary expedient. 

Not so now. The Southern States are in good working condition. 
Each one sends its full quota of representatives to the National Con- 
vention. Many Southern ladies see the uselessness and incongruity 
of this office. The Southern ladies are among the choicest of W. C. 
T. U. women and to their praise be it said, they have kept their work 



126 

practically free from the distresses of partisanship. They vote for the 
partisan resolution at the National Convention, but they guard well 
their local work from its distracting influence. They are able to do 
so because the party which the W. C. T. IT. has espoused is little 
more than a shadow in the South. But whenever the roll of superin- 
tendents is called and the Southern Superintendeney is recognized, the 
memory of bye-gone national griefs are summoned. 
Further, Miss Willard has boldly said : 

"We want the Democratic party to bite the dust, and will do our utmost to 
work its final overthrow. It is the enemy of our cause and we pronounce upon it 
the anathema of the American home." 

Is such an official message to the Democratic South likely to bind 
hearts in sympathetic union in aDd toward TV. C. T. XJ. work ? Doe? 
Senator Colquit and his Democratic Local Option voters, wish to 
facilitate the coming of such an evangel ? 

Like announcement is made to the other great party: 

Nor can we do less to that degenerating party which some of us once loved 
but of which the Brewers League declared, " It has been in power for twenty-five 
years, and has done for us all we asked." The two old parties are nationally the 
sworn allies of the saloon. 

Do such words pave the way for success when our women go to 
the National Congress which is controlled by these two parties ? 

If the "utmost" which the TV. C. T. U. can do, should work the 
overthrow of the Democratic party in the South, Senator Colquit and 
others of his faith would be left at home. If it should succeed as well 
in the North, Senator Blair and Congressman Cutcheon of Michigan, 
and Kerr and Stuble of Iowa, and Dingly of Maine, and a host of 
others as brave and true to temperance might also be rendered pow- 
erless to help us. 

If temperance legislation is desired, is it right to do our utmost 
to overthrow the parties of which these our champions are the rep- 
resentatives. 

Good citizenship demands that patriots shall be defended as well 
as traitors be destroyed. 

These varied distresses might have been avoided if the National 
Union had held to its crusade basis of moral suasion work for total 
abstinence and prohibition: many more would have been reached by 
the truth which alone makes free the individual or the State. 



127 



SPEAK OUT. 

LETTER F£OM MRS. LYDIA II. TILTON, COR. SEC. W. C. T. U. DISTRICT 

OF COLUMBIA. 

Dear Mrs. Foster: 

During my recent visit to New England, I tried to answer criti- 
cisms on the Woman's Christian Temperance Union, and on yourself 
as the representative of non-partisan W. C. T. U. women. The read- 
ers of the facts IX the case were surprised to learn that some truths 
were yet unspoken. 

I met many discouraged ones, and many who were losing interest 
in temperance work. Most intelligent women in New England are in 
sympathy with some one political party ; W. C. T. U. women are of 
course included among " intelligent women;" the strain of the last 
campaign was heavy. 

Imagine the wife of a good Democratic politician — at a temper- 
ance meeting — cheering the sneers at the Democratic party ! and the 
daughter of some grand temperance Republican leader — listening 
with joy to the caustic utterances of Mrs. Hoffman or Mrs. Lathrop !! 
are that wife and that daughter expected to reverence these W. C. T. 
U. leaders ? will their protest against such abusive language prove 
them ''disloyal to prohibition and to the TV. C. T. U.?" 

There is such a thing as repelling those who otherwise might be 
won for the cause. I love our women and our cause too well to be 
silent when I think a little explanation would set things right. 

The first question asked is • ' How can Mrs. Foster be a non- 
partisan and a thoroughly partisan Republican?" I answered, "just 
as you can be a Methodist or a Baptist or a Congregationalist and 
yet insist that your temperance organization is wholly unsectarian. " 

u But why should she help the Republican Party ?" Because she 
believes in the Republican Party and it is her duty — just as it is yours 
and mine — to follow her political convictions. 

1 'But why can't she let us help the Third Party ?" She can and does. 

She urges all men and women to stand for the party which they 
believe to be right. She honors the woman who has clear cut politi- 
cal convictions and will try to secure righteous laws and righteous 
men to enforce them ; but in order that we may be one as a TV. C. T. 
U. in our struggle against the liquor traffic, she would call upon all 
good women to leave religions and -political differences outside the W. 
G. T. U. and as an association be non-partisan and non-sectarian. 



128 

"But we are all for Prohibition, and why can't we take the 
shortest way ?" Our women are not all agreed which is the shortest 
way and we cannot force them to see from our standpoint. 

Mrs. Foster believes the Third Party plan hinders Prohibition. 

Only those who have strong convictions and will follow them even 
to the death are to be depended upon in this fierce struggle. 

We need all the different forces and the different plans to bring 
us all safely to the goal. The great danger is in insisting that all 
must follow our path, and discouraging the dear women who cannot 
take it. 

This summer a discussion arose about the best way for reaching 
the summit of Mt. Washington. One group said "We must go by 
rail, it is the quickest and the best way ;" another ' ' We must go by 
stage so as to see more of the country ;" another "You can't see it 
all in either of those ways, but must walk up." Only one of the whole 
company dared take the eight miles of walking up the steep mountain 
road. We all agreed it would be the best way if we could only do it, 
but we couldn't and we were sure we could go by different ways and 
reach the top, and we did it. 

We are trying to bring ourselves and our people up to the very 
highest plane of Christian civilization. God has already brought us 
up so far that the eyes of the whole world are upon us. The steep 
uplands are frowning before us— we cannot all climb them in the 
same way. What then ? Must we insist upon the one way and so 
break ranks forever ? 

We unite upon a few ways which are agreed upon when we join 
the W. C. T. U. : We were never asked where we joined the society 
what political party we believed in : It was not right after we had 
gone on so well together in the ways we agreed to take, to attempt 
to take us all, whether we like it or not up some other way. 

Many have already fallen out by the way ; and something ought 
to be done to bring them back, and to save others from leaving us. 
Cannot you speak out in some way ? 

Many of us hoped to hear you at the last National Convention 
and were sadly disappointed. The Union Signal said you spoke 
fourteen times. I could not believe it — but the record was before me 
in the shape of the Daily Union Signal, and I counted up ; in nearly 
every case you asked a question, or made a request, or referred to 
some paper or made a motion. 

However, I put it all together and read it slowly as I thought 
you had spoken it, and it took me seven minutes. A reader would 
infer from the statement in the Signal that you "spoke fourteen 
times," that you were permitted to use a large portion of the time of 
the Convention ; that reader would be much surprised to learn, that 



i 






129 

your speeches, questions, suggestions, and motions consumed only 
seven minutes, while Mrs. Lathrop, Mrs. Hoffman and others occu- 
pied hours of time for Third Party speeches, and there was always 
plenty of room upon the platform for Third Party candidates and 
speakers. I do not think you were once on the platform. 

Pardon my question, but ought you not to have been accorded 
the honor of assisting to escort Miss Willard to the Chair after you 
made the motion "that the informal ballot for President be declared 
a formal ballot ?" TIas partisan feeling so come between you and our 
honored President that you must be publicly ignored ? 

Is partisan feeling henceforth to control our conventions ? to for- 
bid our courtesies — to separate friends ? 

Must "Union" become a misnomer, and "Christian" be 
changed to political ? I)o speak out so that our grand women will 
not misunderstand you, and will understand the leaders of the 
National Union. 

They love the W. C. T. U. and have been influenced to think you 
are trying to break up the Union : 

They do not know that you arc trying to point out and cast out 
the unwise methods which are the source of our weakness and present 
trouble. Why do you not speak through the Signal ? 

Are articles by non-partisans refused ? 

Is there a feeling that our word or our judgment must be at 
fault ? 

When the Signal published the statement that "Roman Punch 
was distributed, and wine was served to the initiated in private 
apartments " at the Inaugural Ball, Mar. 4, 1889, I thought the state- 
ment misleading, inasmuch as the said Roman Punch was a water ice 
flavored with some kind of liquor and served with other ices at sup- 
per and not a drink. All wines and liquors were absolutely prohib- 
ited, either to be sold or given aivay upon the premises. I spent two 
days collecting proof which I sent to Union Signal in as concise form 
as possible, but was told by the editor that ' l it was not deemed best 
to publish it." While we object to any use of liquors for flavoring 
ices, or mince pies, or pudding sauces, we certainly rejoice over the 
fact that there was no drinking at the Ball and the wives who went 
there with fear and trembling — remembering the experiences of for- 
mer inaugurals — went home rejoicing. There should have been joy 
and thanksgiving to God for this one step taken in the right direction. 
Anything that helps to make social wine drinking unfashionable is to 
be hailed with joy ; for it is our strongest enemy. 

I suppose the Signal could not rejoice because partisan feeling 
forbade it. 



130 
THE OFFENSE AGAINST IOWA. 

MRS. J. ELLEN FOSTER. IOWA. 

That our sisters in other States may know how sorely the action 
of the National Union disturbs our work in Iowa, the following official 
letter sent to our unions last February is here inserted : 

Dear Sisters of the Iowa W. C. T. U. : 

We greet you in the words of Paul, 1st chap, of 2d Thess. 2, 4, 11, 12. 

From letters being constantly received by your General Officers, we are con- 
vinced that an increasingly large number of women in Iowa, as elsewhere, feel 
impelled to withdraw entirely from W. C. T. U. work, because of their unwilling- 
ness to be financially compromised by the partisan policy of the National W, C. 
T. U. 

These women assert that the General Officers of the National Union give time, 
service, and moral and political influence — in their official capacity— to a political 
party, and vigorous opposition to other parties ; that the machinery of the 
National Union is used— by their consent and co-operation — to carry on the cam- 
paigns of that party, and to accomplish its further party ends ; that the official 
organ of the National Union is the zealous advocate and partisan defender of that 
party. 

These women further claim that by each and all these agencies their temper- 
ance principles, their political convictions and their sense of common justice 
are continually outraged, and that it is wrong for them to sustain directly or indi- 
rectly, a policy which they individually condemn. 

They call on us to witness that their pleadings have been rebuked, their pro- 
tests branded " obstruction ; ' their solemn memorial declared as having neither 
"truth nor foundation,*' and dismissed as the petulance of a "refractory 
child." 

With indignation and sorrow they declare they have exhausted every remedy 
and have only one recourse left, viz.: the withholding of dues from the National 
Society — whose policy has been so deteriorated, and whose spirit has been so 
embittered by alliance with a political party. 

We know the grievances of which those — who now appeal to us — complain : 
they are terribly true ; the National Union by its partisan alliance has furnished 
ground for the repudiation by individual members, of its financial claims. 

Such a diversion of funds as above shown would, in a commercial organiza- 
tion, be regarded "bad faith ; " it would afford occasion for redress in courts of 
law. We do not censure our sisters who feel that the higher claims of Christian 
equity demand that they should separate themselves from a policy which they 
consider essentially wrong. 

For ourselves, we have believed the payment of dues to N. W. C. T. U. 
though inconsistent with our Iowa non-partisan policy, wrought less harm to our 
State work than would any other course. 

Possibly our connection with the National Union since its organization, our 
long years of pleasant association with its membership, our devotion to its 
leaders, may have unduly influenced our decision upon these and relevant 
questions. 



131 

We have therefore, in all good conscience, continued the payment of 
national dues and have endeavored to persuade others to do likewise. But we 
now find ourselves confronted with an unlooked for condition of things. We find 
our own members weary of this continual controversy about methods, and tired 
of their partnership with that which they consider wrong. 

They are in harmony with the State work and its policy; they desire to help 
the State maintain its present non-partisan attitude, but they will not do that if 
they at the same time help to support the National in its war on Iowa, and on the 
principles and policies by which Iowa has driven the saloons of the State from 
their legal entrenchments. 

We would be glad if all our members looked at this question as we do, and 
were willing to aid us in our attempt to turn the policy of the National back to its 
former non-partisan position. 

But the work in Iowa is the first burden laid on our hearts. We dare not 
permit it to suffer by any timid negligence on our part. We are compelled 
to respect the conscientious convictions of these our sisters who trust us. 

We will not longer hesitate to assume the responsibility which attaches to our 
official position. 

The Constitution of the State Union provides that all orders for the payment 
of money — including national dues — shall be signed by the President and Secre- 
tary ; we therefore hereby announce to all whom it may concern, that when a 
formal request is made in writing by any local treasurer to the State Treasurer^ 
that the national dues of any certain number of women be retained in the State 
treasury, we will not order the payment of said dues to the National Treasurer, 
but will instruct the State Treasurer to hold the same in trust for the National 
Union until such time as the National Union places itself in its original non-par- 
tisan position and rightfully claims our unconditional support, or until we obtain 
other constitutional relief. 

W r e also request all local presidents and treasurers to carefully observe the 
wishes of members in this regard, and to state to the State Treasurer when dues 
are sent, how many members are willing to still pay their proportion to the 
National treasury, and how many wish them retained in trust by the State 
Treasurer. 

With earnest desire to do that which is just and right. 

Yours faithfully, 
(Signed) J. Ellen Foster, 

Pres. Iowa W. C. T.U. 
Mary J. Aldrich, 

Cor. Sec. 

It has been repeatedly declared in W. C. T. U. circles that an 
official statement of the General Officers of the Iowa Union debars 
any Third Party woman from office or membership in the Society. 

This official statement is here given that those who desire to know 
the truth may judge for themselves : 

(From Iowa W. C. T. U. Messenger.) 
CONSTITUTIONAL LBHTATIONS PRESENTED. 
Dear Sisters of the Iowa Unions, Greeting in His Name : 

At the last National Convention your Iowa delegation were surprised and 
pained to learn that three vice-presidents in their official capacity, and certain 



132 



officers and members of local unions, had memorialized the Executive Committee 
of the National Union to aid them through organizers and speakers to prosecute 
Prohibition party work in leva. Political party work in the Iowa W. C. T. U. is 
contrary to an express provision of the Constitution of the Slate Union and is 
disloyalty to the W. C. T. U. of Iowa ; it is a violation of the covenant made by 
each individual when she accepts office under the Constitution of the Society, or 
when she becomes a member of a local union. 

No woman is elligible to official position, or even to membership in a local 
union, who does not endorse the Constitution of the State Union. The first pro- 
vision of this Constitution declares, the W. C. T. U. of Iowa shall be "non-sectar- 
ian in its religious, and non-partisan in its political work." An acceptance of the 
fundamental principles and requirements of the constitution of any voluntary 
organization, is the only basis of honorable membership in such organization. 
Membership in an organization implies such acceptance 

Jf'ith individual opinion and individual action the organization neither has, nor 
assumes to have any control. A \V. C. T. U. -woman may believe in and advocate tht 
principles and policies of any political party, and at the same time be a loyal W. C. T. U. 
•woman ; but any W. C. T. U. woman who seeks to use the name or the influence 
of the W. C. T. U. to further the interests of any political party, the Prohibition 
party not excepted, is disloyal to the W. C. T. U. in Iowa. The united work of 
individuals in this as in every other voluntary organization is subject to the lim- 
itations and provisions of the constitution of the organization. 

If the present party policy of the N. \Y. C. T. U. were incorporated in the 
constitution of that body, the continued opposition of many women, in Iowa and 
elsewhere, to that party policy would be disloyalty. 

This is not the case. The alliance of the National Union with a political 
party has been often declared by resolution in annual meeting, but it is not a 
part of the Constitution. Iowa's non-partisan policy is a part of the Constitution. 
It was made so at the annual meeting in 1887. It was the result of years of expe- 
rience in securing the prohibition of the liquor traffic and other legislation in the 
interest of our work. 

In view of the county and district conventions soon to meet, we have thought 
it our duty to bring these undisputed facts, and these essential principles 
to your earnest consideration. Remembering all the way the Lord has led 
us : we bid you praise Him for all that is passed, and trust for all that is to come. 

Yours by the White Ribbon, 

J. Ellen Foster, Prcs. 

M. J. ALDRICH, Cor. Sec. 
F. J. OviNGTON, Rec, Sec. 
S. W. Black, Treas. 
Des Moines, May 1, 1889. 



133 
ECCLBCIASTICAL ASSUMPTIONS. 

MRS. FLORENCE MILLER, IOWA. 

The plan of work adopted by the New York Convention gives the 
following under head of Evangelistic. 

"That the plan of the establishment of an Order of W. C. T. U. Deaconesses 
be made a subject of special study and discussion by State and local unions dur- 
ing the coming year. These deaconesses to be commissioned as such upon pass- 
ing examination in all requisite intellectual and spiritual gifts, and for whom 
recognition shall be asked from all ecclesiastical bodies, and who shall be subject 
to call and appointment to pastoral service whenever needed." 

No word of the quartette making up the name of our organiza- 
tion is so prized as " Christian :"* no work in all the forty departments 
is so emphasized as Evangelistic ; no port of convention proceedings 
is more precious than the religious services. The supreme desire, the 
most diligent effort of the women, has been to make the organization 
as near akin to the church as possible, in all its work for God and 
home. It has held in the minds of the people a place beside the 
church as one of the evangelizing forces of the world, and it is its 
boast that it is the " right arm of the church." 

By the church it has been most cordially appreciated and sus- 
tained. Most kindly sympathy has been extended, the warmest wel- 
come accorded to the work of the society, by the ministry and the 
church. The developement of women in the Evangelistic department, 
the popularity and success of their work, the open door to pulpit 
work through church welcome to the women temperance Evangelists, 
has aroused attention to the ecclesiastical limitations proscribing 
women in the ministry. 

It has aroused women themselves to a sense of the injustice of 
these limitations upon their powers for service to God and humanity, 
and made them restive under ecclesiastical restrictions, so the cry has 
gone up from the Woman's Christian Temperance Union for ecclesias- 
tical emancipation. And the National Union in furtherance of the 
cause of woman's emancipation, rather than in the furtherance of the 
evangelization of the world to temperance truth — it seems to critical, 
judicial observers — has inaugurated a system of certificates, a course 
of study, an order of deaconesses, and with approving favor has 
received the audacious proposition to establish a church union in 
which women shall be regularly licensed and ordained to preach. 

The proposition to establish an order of deaconesses is that they 
are to be "trained in our Evangelistic department, taught to be 



134 

skilled nurses in our temperance hospital, and employed by our local 
unions in preaching, teaching, and visiting the sick and poor." T 
deaconesses are to be supported by means solicited or collected by the 
local anions. 

The order of deaconesses is peculiarly a church order. The name, 
the order, its sanctity, its ordination belong especially to the church, 
and the proposition to establish such an order in the W. C. T. U. 
which has no ecclesiastic power — "to set them apart to this sacred 
office " is an impertinence unworthy the womanhood of the organiza- 
tion. 

The W. C. T. I", ought not to usurp churchly orders. or assume 
churchly authority. It can have a temperance hospital, it can train 
nurses for useful work among the sick, it can have temperance Evan- 
gelists, but their commission should be within the limits and bounds 
of the principles and purposes of the organization they represent ; and 
the boundary line of TV. C. T. U. Evangelistic work ought nor to 
trench upon that of the ordained work of the church of Christ. 

There is work enough for all the women who may be enlisted by 
wha* _ ncy. but with no ecclesiastical authority to confer the 

title, with the field already occupied by the church, a rightful defer- 
ence for church authority, a Christian - the proprieties of the 

a becoming moo 3 a philanthropic- society, should lead 

to do our Evangelical work along lines in no way trenching upon or 
interfering with the work of the church. 

And further — the lemanci] rill not in- 

ecclesiastical emancipation if it is not accomplished within the church. 

mount of freedom i I by an outside org n will count 

for justice for women in the church. The fitness of woman for all 
claims of opportunity to work for G»d and humanity n rare* 

authority, has been sufficiently demonstrated, and th st for its 

recognition needs to be steadfastly ; within the church ite 

an outside pressure that antagonizes, will hinder. n<>t help. It will 
not be victory unless she conquers within her own. 

>*o amount of assumption of the - - -tical 

bodies can invest the W. C. T. U. with the sacred mantle of the 
Church of God. and the triumph of woman in the church in securing 
rightful recognition to do any work in pew or pulpit that she can do 
well and to the glory of God. could only be crippled in - for 

I by the present and proposed attitude of the N. W. C. T. 17. on 
the question of W. C. T. U. deaconess s .ion." 



135 



PARTISAN PLEDGES IX W. C. T. U. CONVENTIONS. 

-. M. .1. ALDRICH, [OWA. 

> 

The preacher says " there is a time to keep silence and a time to 
speak. ,? It may not be time lor me to speak ; it may be thai silence. 
even now, would he golden, hut, I feel impelled to write an open letter 
| to all non-partisan temperance women, members of unions, who are 

opposed to party W. C. T. U. work, who nevertheless through inat- 
tention or carelessness, fail to have their views represented in our W. 
C, T. U. conventions by delegates elected for that purpose. 

In as much as the influence of the party work of our N. W. C. T. 
U. is not limited to that organization I would also enlist the thought 
and ask the co-operation of all those Christian Temperance Women 
who neglect to help in our W. C. T. U. work because of the conten- 
tion resulting from the prohibition party work of the National Union. 
I would like to have the many sympathizers with the non-partisan 
W. C. T. U. methods of work realize that the W. C. T. IT. is here to 
stay ; that it is a power and will continue to be, politically as well as 
morally, and that the remedy for the mistaken party policy of the 
National Union really rests with them. 

Large and influential as is the National Union conceded to be, the 
most potential factor in the prohibition party and its work, it has not 
yet enrolled in its membership more than one-third of the Christian 
Temperance Women of this country. Its position on woman suffrage 
has been one hindrance, and its party policy for the last three years 
has been a far greater objection. The active opposition of these silent 
opponents of this party policy could turn the scale in favor of non- 
partisan temperance W. C. T. U. work blessing our land and hasten- 
ing the day of its redemption from the liquor curse. Shall not that 
active opposition be henceforth given ? Does not the good of the 
temperance cause as well as the best interests of the W. C. T. U. 
require it ? 

If this question could come home to every Christian Temperance 
Woman who now stands aloof from the Union as a question of duty, it 
would be decided rightly, and disaster averted. 

No temperance organization of men, with ballots in their hands. 
would submit to such action as that taken by the N. W. C. T. U. and 
no temperance organization ought to submit to it. 

The main reason why T women who are opposed to party W. C. T. 
U. work fail to send delegates to conventions who will represent their 
non-partisan views in the convention, is because this subject is rarely 



136 

ever discussed by the Unions, and women do not think of it in connec- 
tion with the election of delegates. The actual work of the local 
unions is conducted in a non-partisan manner, as illustrated by the 
following incident which occurred at the close of union meetings held 
during a TV. C. T. U. week of prayer : — A lady who had recently come 
to the city was in attendance upon the meetings, and at the close of 
the last one. was speaking about becoming a member of some W. 0. 
T. U. in the city. 

A member of the first union organized in that State in which the 
constitution declared the Union to be non-partisan, said to her, "If 
you are not a third party woman you had better join our union, for 
ours is a non-partisan union. " The Secretary of a Union whose active 
workers were known to favor party TV. C. T. U. work, said, " I don't 
think you ought to call our union a third party union ; the subject is 
scarcely ever mentioned in our meetings at all." "I know it," 
replied the lady who remembers too well the efforts made by the third 
party faction of this particular union, to prevent any expression of 
opinion by the non-partisan majority in 1885 — " I know you can't dis- 
cuss the subject, but when yon send delegates to convention they are 
third party women, and have been for the last three years." 

If it was right for the National or a State Union, to adopt a par- 
tisan policy at all (which is not admitted except for the argument), 
then, if the majority of any local or State Union was in favor of party 
TV. C. T. U. work it would be right for that Union to semi delegates 
to the TV. C. T. U. conventions, who wonld sustain the partisan pol- 
icy, both in the election of officers and the adoption of resolutions or 
plans of work ; but if the majority of any Union is not in favor of the 
Prohibition Party work of the YV. C. T. U. then, it would not be right 
for their delegates to misrepresent their constituency simply because 
the subject had not been discussed and no one thought about it when 
the delegates were elected. 

Delegates to a Convention ought to conscientiously represent the 
societies sending them, or if their views are such that they cannot in 
conscience vote as they believe the majority of the society would 
desire, they should refuse to accept the position of a representative of 
the society. Oft-times one. in such a position, to be true to her duties 
as a delegate, explains her vote— that it is not in accord with her 
individual convictions, but as representing their society. Put it is 
not right for any Union to adopt a partisan policy. 

I am an enthusiastic TV. C. T. U. woman. I believe in its legiti- 
mate work for the principles of total abstinence and prohibition, and 
all the political changes which that work involves, but I am utterly 
opposed to party political work by the TV. C. T. U. organization. 



137 

I rejoice in the success of any W. 0. T. U. in the prosecution of 
legitimate union work, but I would openly work for the defeat of any 
party work of any union. I do not consider party temperance work 
as legitimate W. C. T. U. work. I believe that the political opinions 
preferences and "influence" of each individual W, C. T. U. woman 
are her own, subject to her own disposal, to be by herself given to Die 
party of her choice, and cannot rightfully be voted away, by any 
majority however large, to any political party whatsoever. 

I am just as much opposed to the action of the N. W. C. T. IT. in 
which by an overwhelming majority they pledged the u influence " of 
the N. W. C. T. U. to the Prohibition Party, and no more so, than I 
would be if the church of which I am a member should, by a large 
majority, vote that the " influence" of that church should be given to 
the Prohibition Party. The wrong is just the same in one case, as it 
would be in the other. 

It is not the privilege of the church by a majority vote to give 
political influence of its members to any party, neither is it right for 
the National Union to thus give or u pledge " that " influence." 

The Prohibition Party sympathizers in any church would protest 
most emphatically and rightfully, if the church, in a called meeting, 
or through its representatives in an official meeting should vote that 
the political " influence "of the chnrch l ( in its entirety " should be 
given to the Republican or Democratic party. And if the advocates 
of the Prohibition Party in any representative ecclesiastical meeting 
should vote to give the political u influence "of the churches they 
represented to any political party they would be guilty of the same 
political tyranny and political robbery that the N. W. C. T. U. com- 
mitted at St. Louis in 1884 and has endorsed every year since. 

I believe that action not only just as wrong in principle in the 
N. W. C. T. U. as it would be in a church ; but it would have been 
wrong in principle even if the subject had been discussed previously in 
every local union in the whole United States, and in every union it 
had been favored by a two-thirds vote. No majority has the right to 
vote away the political ' ' influence " of any member of any church or 
society like the W. C. T. U. It was, however, doubly wrong, because 
it had not been so discussed, and the delegates in those National Con- 
ventions did not in many cases truly represent the sentiment of the 
local unions. 

Is it any wonder that the majority of the Iowa delegates, in both 
National and State Conventions, have been opposed to this action of 
the N. W. C. T. U. for all these years ? They know too well what 
prohibition means for Iowa and what party prohibition would do for 
the State, to have taken any other position than a firm, determined 
stand in favor of continuing their non-partisan temperance work. 



138 

It was a belief thai party political work in, and by the W. C. T. 
TJ. of Iowa, would harm the cause of prohibition in the State, as well 
as a just regard to the right of every member of the Union to control 
the disposal of her own political influence that led the State Union to 
take, and has enabled it to maintain a non-partisan position. 

I firmly believe that if the subject had been discussed in every 
local union, and the delegates elected in accordance with the views of 
the majority of the members, that the party faction in our State would 
have been far less turbulent and troublesome. 

And I am confident that if the Christian Temperance Women in 
our churches had realized the importance of the contest maintained by 
the non-partisan W. C. T. U. women for the last few years, that more 
women would have given their names and membership fees to the 
local unions, even if they could not give time and labor to the work ; 
and furthermore they would have seen to it that they were truly rep- 
resented in W. C. T. U. Conventions by delegates who thought as 
they did. 

T hope they will do so in the years to come. The contest is not 
over. If ever the Iowa Union recedes from the non-partisan position 
maintained during the last three years against the opposition of the 
few, working in harmony with the N. W. C. T. U., it will be through 
the votes of third party delegates from unions that have not discussed 
the question — delegates who represent their own views on the party 
question, and misrepresent their roust ituency. It has been done, and 
will be again, unless Christian Temperance Women are willing, in 
womanly and Christian ways, to oppose, openly and firmly, though 
kindly and courteously, — the alliance of an organization like ours with 
any political party. The party preferences of the individual woman 
need have nothing to do with this opposition to party W. C. T. U. 
work. It should have nothing to do with it. A woman though a 
member of the union, should be free to be an ardent Republican, or 
Democrat, or Greenbaeker. or a Prohibition party woman ; but the 
union should do no party work, send no delegates to party conven- 
tions, purchase and circulate no party literature, secure and pay 
no party speakers ; nor have the adherents of any party though in the 
majority any right to vote thatfthe influence of any other W. C. T. U. 
woman shall be given to the party of their choice. The political 
wrong would be the same whether that party was in harmony with 
their prohibition principles or not ; in power or out of power. This 
conflict of opinion was not brought about by the non-partisan W. C. 
T. U. women. It is the result of the action of the W. C. T. U. offi- 
cers and delegates in the St. Louis and subsequent conventions. It 
cannot cease unless the minority in the National Union acquiesce in a 
wrong the majority would not submit to, were the tables turned. 
With charity for all and malice toward none." 



t i 



139 



aEPRBSENTATIVE ACTION. 

MRS. FLORENCE MILLER, IOWA. 

its constituency. . 

free; no. bound by any principle espoused, or plan devised j 

National Union. _ . 

™ *r *• i w p T TT is composed of certain ex-omcio mem- 
The National \ V . L. 1. l. i& oomp^ rr Wp rfpWates 

rS rests in the fact of its representee character. 

The action of a free legislative delegate body is eminently repre- 

w)iole 

The fallacy of the freedom of states and individnals-the declara- 

be included in the whole » in principle espon ed or p an= *« 

approval of the party alliance. 



HO 

The latter are told that no action has been taken u binding any 
member to the Prohibition Party," and this in the face of such declara- 
tions as that "we" — the organization — ''reaffirm our allegiance" to 
the Prohibition Party, — "we" — the organization in which all are 
included — -'arc practically partisan," "the white ribbon arm} is 
practically solid for the Prohibition Party." "200,000 stand soli lly 
for the Prohibition Party," and many similar declarations in testimony 
that the political power of the whole organization has been given to 
the Prohibition Party. 

The same is true of the suffrage question. The Southern States 
do not endorse the position of the National Union in relation to it, 
but under the declaration of "freedom of states" hug the delusion 
that they have no part or lot in this to them, obnoxious endorsement. 

The constitutional construction of the organization in ex-officio 
relation is alsq a strong factor in its representative character. The 
auxiliary states are bound to the National union even before they are 
independent constituencies, and before they have delegate representa- 
tion, for every State President is by force of the National Constitu- 
tion, vice-president of the National Society. 

To claim the representative character of the National Union in 
membership, duos, principles and plans, and abrogate its power to 
bind its auxiliaries to those plans and principles in National policy, 
is pi, tying a game of fast and loose with constitutional law, and is an 
untruth upon which are builded erroneous views of representative gov- 
ernment and false conceptions of organized relations. It is time the 
vicious theory of the freedom of States and individuals from the action 
of a body, dependent upon and representative of these States and 
individuals should be exploded. 

A little dynamite of truth and honest dealing is needed to clear 
the atmosphere of sophistry and pretenses under the guise of ^toler- 
ance and forbearance." 



141 



PROPOSED AMENDMENTS. 

NON-PARTISAN AMENDMENT — TO BE VOTED ON AT NATIONAL CONVENTION, 
CHICAGO, NOVEMBER 1889. 

■v 

[Introduced by Mrs. Campbell, of Alleghany County, Penna. — herself 
a believer in the Prohibition party.] 

From Daily Union Signal Nov. 5th, 1888. 

Mrs. Campbell— I desire to offer an amendment to the Constitution. I hereby 
give notice that I or some one in my place will offer next year an amendment to 
article I of the Constitution by adding to the article, as it now reads, the following- 
words : 

"Its object shall be to interest and unite the Christian women of this nation 
in non-sectarian and non-partisan temperance work for the reformation of the 
intemperate, the education of the public sentiment in favor of total abstinence, 
and the prohibition of traffic in alcoholic liquors. For the promotion of social 
purity, the suppression of vice and crime, and the education of the masses in re- 
gard to the duties and responsibilities of good citizenship." 

In connection with this amendment I desire to announce that a meeting of 
all those interested in this amendment will be held in the parlor of the Broadway 
Tabernacle after the adjournment this afternoon. 

LOYALTY TEST AMENDMENT. 

[As introduced by Mrs. Louise S. Rounds, President Illinois W. C. T. 
U. to be voted on at National Convention, Chicago, Nov. 1889.] 

"Mrs. Rounds— I wish (then) to give notice and I give this notice that we may 
be in harmony with the action we have just taken on resolution No. 7, and I read 
the By-Laws, Article 8, Section 2, "No State Union," etc. 

"I now give notice that I or some one in my place will, at the next Annual 
Convention, move that the first clause of the by-laws be stricken out, and that 
the by-law shall read : 

"All States auxiliary to the National W. C. T. U. must subscribe to the con- 
stitution of the National Union, and both States and individuals shall be required 
to respect all principles espoused by the National Union." 

Madam President, I do this that we may hold a logical position." 

The Loyalty Test Amendment introduced by Mrs. Rounds, Pres- 
ident of the W. C. T. IT. of Illinois, to be voted on at Chicago, 
November 1889 — as it appears in the Minutes of the New York Con- 
vention, page 63 : 

NOTICE. 

4 T now give notice that at the next annual meeting, I or some one in my 
place, will move that the first clause of Section 2, Article VIII of the By-Laws be 
stricken out, and that the By-Laws shall read : "All State auxiliaries must sub- 
-scribe to the total abstinence pledge and to the Constitution of the National 
Union." 



142 
IS IT NOT TRUE ? 

MRS. M. J. ALDRICH, IOWA. 

First, That in this country the undisputed right of the majority 
to rule does not give that majority the right to violate, infringe or 
trample upon any right of the minority? 

Second, That every man has an undisputed right to the absolute 
control and disposal of his own ballot ? 

That no person and no majority has the right to interfere, by force 
or otherwise, with the freest exercise of any man's political liberty to 
absolutely control the disposal of his ballot ? 

Third, That no man has the right to vote for another representa- 
tively except the authority has been properly conferred ? 

IS IT NOT ALSO TRUE ? 

Fourth, That a woman's political "influence" stands to her in the 
place of a ballot ? 

Fifth, That every woman has an undisputed right to the absolute 
control and disposal of her own political " influence " according 
to the convictions of her own judgment, and the dictates of her own 
conscience ? 

Sixth, That no woman has the right to pledge, or dispose of the 
political "influence" of another, except such representative action has 
been duly authorized ? 

Seventh, That the National Union was. and is composed of 
women united in their desire to promote the religious, scientific, 
economic and political truths of Total Abstinence and Prohibition but 
who were and are divided in their political party and their religious 
denomination preferences ? 

Eighth, That the annual meeting of the National Union is a dele- 
gated body representing all the women of the local unions in all the 
State auxiliaries and legislating for them concerning the temperance 
work of the organization ? 

Ninth, That up to 1884 the work of the Union was carried on 
without any interference with or reference to the political pre- 
ferences of the individual membership ? 

Tenth, That at St. Louis the majority of ^the Convention there 
assembled resolved to "lend the influence of the Union to the Prohibi- 
tion Party" in the same resolution declaring that each individual 
member of the Union and each State auxiliary were free to give or 
withhold their influence from said party? 



'[ 14: 



Eleventh, That this action of the National Union was representa- 
tive, and did commit the organization "in its entirety'' to the Prohi- 
bition party? 

Twelfth, That this representative action was unwarranted, unjust, 
inconsistent, wrong ; unwarranted, because unauthorized by those 
whom the delegates represented ; unjust, because this action of the 
majority infringed the right of the minorty to the absolute control and 
disposal of their own political "influence" ; inconsistent, because the 
declared freedom of individuals and State auxiliaries from the bind- 
ing force of the resolution was impossible so long as the resolution 
w r as in force at all, inasmuch as the "influence" of the constituent 
parts were, and are included in the influence of the whole organiza- 
tion, which by the adoption of the resolution was and still is pledged 
to the Prohibition party; wrong, because unwarranted, unjust and 
inconsistent — is not all this true ? 

TS IT NOT ALSO TRUE ? 

Thirteenth, That the resolution of the National Uninn is de facto 
in conflict with the undisputed liberty of any and every State auxil- 
iary to keep itself free from any party alliance whatever, even while 
the resolution professedly recognizes that liberty ? 

Fourteenth, That the National Union ought to jealously respect 
and guard the right of any State auxiliary to be non-partisan in its 
political temperance work ? 

Fifteenth, That the National Union ought to recognize respect 
and protect the right of every woman in the N. W. C. T. U. to the 
entire control and free disposal of her individual political influence, 
untrammelled by her official position or membership in the 
Union ? 

Sixteenth, That this has not been done and that it cannot be done 
until the partisan action of 1884 is rescinded and the original condi- 
tions of united temperance work are restored ? 

Seventeenth, That the irrepressible conflict between the National 
action in 1884, and the undisputed rights of State auxiliaries and 
individual members of the N. W. C. T. U. could be removed by the 
adoption of the amendment to the N. W. C. T. U. Constitution pro- 
posed by Mrs. Campbell of Pennslyvania, viz.: "Its object shall be 
to interest and unite the Christian women of this nation in non-sectar- 
ian and non-partisan temperance work, for the reformation of the 
intemperate, the education of public sentiment in favor of total abstin- 
ence and the prohibition of the traffic in all alcoholic beverages, for the 
promotion of social purity, the suppression of vice and crime, and the 
education of the masses in regard to the duties and responsibilities of 
good citizenship ?" 



144 

Eighteenth, That it ought to be done for "His sake and in His 
name," the cause of the present discord and division in our ranks be 
removed, and ' ' the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace be 
restored ? " 

Nineteenth, Will you not work for such a result ? 



145 



ARE "NON-PARTISANS" PARTISAN? 

MRS. J. ELLEN FOSTER, IOWA. 

The question is often asked, "Is not the minority in the N. W. C. 
T. U. as intensely partisan as the majority; is not Mrs. Foster an 
active Republican, as earnest in her platform advocacy of Republican 
doctrines and as trusted in the counsels of party managers and as res- 
ponsible for Republican methods in dealing with the temperance ques- 
tion as is Miss Willard for the Third Party? 

To this we reply: Mrs. Foster is earnest in her belief and advo- 
cacy of Republicanism ; she is trusted in the temperance counsels of 
Republicans, she willingly shares the responsibility of the general 
tread of Republicanism on the temperance question. 

The difference between her position and that of Miss Willard is 
that Mrs. Foster's Republican party work is done as an individual, 
she does not attempt to coerce the opinion or carry the influence of 
the W. C. T. U. organization to these party ends. 

Miss Willard does in her official capacity support the Third 
Party; she is instrumental in pledging the W. C. T. U. in the States 
to support the Third Party ; she goes in person to local conventions 
and pleads for this party alliance ; she gives official approbation to 
official representation of the W. C. T. U. in Third Party political con- 
ventions ; she is herself, by vote of the N. W. C. T. U. Convention a 
"consulting member" of the National Prohibition Committee; she 
uses the platform of W. C. T. U. Conventions in personal advocacy of 
the Third Party and its candidates ; she herself introduces these gen- 
tlemen as the candidates of "Our Party." 

This Mrs. Foster has never done. In Iowa, where the Republi- 
can party has warranted the largest approbation of temperance 
women, and where if anywhere the society would be justified in prom- 
ising allegiance, there the W. C. T. U. has never given it, and Mrs. 
Foster has time and time again declared it never could be done with 
her approval. To fail to see the difference between official action and 
individual action reveals a lamentable condition of mental and moral 
obliquity. 

In the conflicts of modern civilization it argues pitiful imbecility 
not to possess political convictions ; it argues mental or moral cow- 
ardice not to advocate them. 

This is as true of women as of men, but the political immorality 
of the N. W. C. T. U. consists in its appropriation of the political 



146 

influence of the minority against their protest ; that influence was 
given to the organization to keep and to use but not to assign to any 
political party. 

In civil courts, to obtain property under false pretenses is 
'•'embezzlement,'' and to divert funds from their assigned and consti- 
tutional uses is " fraud. "the difference in honor being in favor of the 
embezzler, the grand larceny committed by this Christian organiza- 
tion being of heart and soul and home ''influence - ' while the embezzler 
merely steals material value. 

This is what the TV. C. T. U. has done. 

Ought not the majority to rule, and do not a large majority of 
the women of the TV. C. T. U. desire to give their support to the 
Third Party? 

A large majority of the delegates and ex-officio membei 
National Conventions do. but even a legislative majority cannot < 
ride the Constitution. If the various resolutions affirming and 
reaffirming the allegiance of TV. C. T. U. to the '-Third Party" are 
constitutional, there is no resistance to the logical result which the 
Illinois women are brave enough to offer, viz : that party fealty shall 
be a test of membership in the TV. 0. T. U. 



147 



UNITE THE FORCES. 

PUBLISHING COMMITTEE, IOWA W. C. T. U. MESSENGER. 

The Iowa W. C. T. IT. Messenger, official organ of the Iowa 
State Union, is the only weekly non-partisan W. C. T. U. paper pub- 
lished. It is a fearless exponent of the Iowa position, and voices the 
convictions of thousands of women in other States who are not in har- 
mony with the National Union. 

The Messenger would like to hear from these thousands and will 
gladly give them voice in any worthy communication sent its editor. 
The paper would also be glad of the patronage and support of friends 
in sympathy with its position, and it would in turn be an inspiration 
and help in their work. 

Friends of non-partisan temperance work will find the paper well 
worth the subscription price, $1.00 per year. The paper is just being 
established upon the foundation of a stock company, after nearly four 
years' existence with a good subscription list, and this stock company 
is known as the Woman's Iowa Publishing Company. Shares of stock 
$10.00 each. Mrs. J. Ellen Foster, Mrs. M.' J. Aldrich, Mrs. S. W. 
Black, Mrs. F. J. Ovington, Mrs. M. E. Callahan and other well- 
known Iowa women are incorporators of the Woman's Iowa Publish- 
ing Company and are guarantees of its worthiness and stability. 

The price of shares is within the reach of all, and one, two, three, 
five or more shares of stock will be a most excellent investment. We 
believe there are many temperance friends in the country outside of 
Iowa, who would be glad to have an interest in a live, non-partisan 
temperance paper, and we confidently hope these will take stock in 
the Woman's Iowa Publishing Company. 

All inquiries, and money for shares of stock should be addressed 
to Mrs. S. W. Black, Cedar Rapids, Iowa. All subscriptions and 
communications for the paper should be addressed to Mrs. Florence 
Miller, 810 Grand Ave., East Des Moines, Iowa. 

Let us hear from friends. Let the Iowa women feel the heart- 
beat of your sympathy in the brave fight they make for justice and 
right, and give them the opportunity to help you by furnishing a 
means of communication, an inspiration of courage, a mutual reliance 
and help in standing for the truth. In ' ' union there is strength. " 
Lend a helping hand for a union of forces through the medium of the 
Messenger. Let us hear from all well-wishers of non-partisan temper- 
ance work. 



148 



PRINCIPLES — POLICIES — POLITICAL PARTIES — REFORM 

ASSOCIATIONS. 

MRS. J. ELLEN FOSTER, IOWA. 

Parties are useful as a convenient means of recording the popular 
will on questions of legislative policy. 

They are not the Garden of the Lord wherein reforms are grown; 
reforms which one after another have been, and shall be wrought into 
the nation's governmental life. The Church, the school, the home, the 
moral reform association, these are the beautiful flower beds where 
are grown all the trees and fruits of the Kingdom of Heaven which 
shall be set upon the earth when human law is the copy of the 
divine. 

Let us build again the hedges of Christian love and charity about 
onr W. C. T. U. garden and drive out the hoofs of partisanship 
which trample our lovely flowers in the dust. 

Do not be afraid to discuss this question on its real merits. It is 
simply this : 

Ought the W. C. T. U. to ally itself with a political party ?— only 
that and nothing more. 

Not — Is the Republican party a temperance party? 

Not — Is the Third Party doing a good work, and ought I as a 
temperance woman to support it ? 

I remember that one of old who was branded as a disturber of 
the peace replied, "I have not troubled Israel, but thou and thy house 
in that ye have forsaken the Lord and followed Baal." These verses 
in the Crusade psalm often come to me, 'Tut not your trust in princes 
nor in the son of man in whom there is no help." 

I pray God to forgive us all for any such entanglement of our holy 
cause. We err when we confound principles with methods and make 
adherence to one the test of devotion to the other. 

We are Prohibitionists — every one of us — do we not know what it 
means to fight the demon of drink in the man and in the saloon ? 
would not we of Iowa joyfully give our lives rather than lose what we 
have gained through non-partisan methods of temperance work ? 

Let every woman have her party preference according to her own 
political convictions ; let her be a Republican, a Democrat, a Union 
Labor woman, an adherent of the Third or any other party, but let 
her not seek to appropriate the influence of her sisters of the Woman's 
Christian Temperance Union to her party. To do this in the W. b. 
T. U. is appropriating influence "under false pretenses." 



149 

Not — What did this woman or that woman mean when she said 
so and so, or is this woman or that woman sincere in her beliefs ? It 
is always right to suppose all women are honest in their beliefs ; but 
whether they are or are not, does not determine whether or not their 
views shall be accepted. 

A- woman who is wise enough to join a W. C. T. U. is wise 
enough to determine any political question which properly comes 
before that Society. Always make a distinction between political 
questions and party questions , all questions of government are polit- 
ical questions, but they are not all party questions. 

We want our temperance question to be a subject of pure politi- 
cal action and that it may be so we strive to keep it away from the 
complications of partisanship. 

Always remember too that under a popular form of government 
what is in the hearts and minds of the people must come out in the 
laws of the people. 

It cannot appear in the law until the knowledge and desire are 
formed in the minds and hearts of the people. 

Any one who increases knowledge and creates desire is doing the 
greatest possible service to her country. 

Women, is not this a wide and safe field of Woman's Christian 
Temperance Union action, does it not afford full scope to all our 
powers ? God bless us, every one. 



150 
PERSONAL. 

MRS. J. ELLEN FOSTER, IOWA. 

My heart was nearly broken when I was first obliged to differ 
from Miss Willard. I loved her with a chivalrous devotion not 
common among women. My admiration was absolute and unques- 
tioning. 

She was more skilled in political matters than I. We entered 
the temperance work at about the same time, but she had been 
connected with educational work which taught her how to manage 
people, while I had been engaged in domestic affairs and the care of 
my little children. 

When the crusade came with its grand possibilities of woman's 
work for temperance, it found me wholly unused and quite averse to 
public work for woman. I gave to Miss Willard the ardor of a per- 
sonal devotion, which drew to itself the religious fervor of that Holy 
War. Her words were to me, almost as sacred as the spirit of the 
movement itself. 

In the early years of our work I did not question her methods or 
exercise my judgment concerning them — 1 was only too happy to 
follow where she led. I am not sorry that I loved her so devotedly, 
for love is a noble sentiment and elevates the person who indulges it ; 
but I am sorry that I allowed my affectional nature to overcome my 
judgment. 

In matters of trivial importance, not involving questions of right 
or wrong, one is often justified in waving one's opinions and prefer- 
ences, but in questions of duty let every woman stand for herself at 
the bar of her own conscience. 

As the work progressed and my official relation to it necessitated 
my individual action, my great error was, that in the settlement of 
any question of duty in the W. C. T. U. where Miss Willard and I 
differed in judgment, I always yielded mine to hers — I did not realize 
then as I do now the great responsibility of public teaching. I did 
not realize that wrong theories, however plausible, and for the present 
seemingly expedient, are sure in time, and when applied by many 
persons, to lead to wrong action. 

Neither did I realize that it is unsafe, unwise, and morally wrong 
by indefiniteness in statement, by trick or device of Convention 
action, or by the sweet coercion of personal affection, to secure the 
nominal acceptance of principles and methods, which do not command 
the intelligent, hearty and forceful approval of real conviction in the 



' 151 

minds and hearts of the "women at home" for whom such representa- 
tive action is taken. 

It is painful to la}* open to the gaze of even my sisters in the 
Woman's Christian Temperance Union this weakness in myself, which 
was occasioned by my personal devotion to Miss Willard. 

Many women know, however, that they have been similarly 
weak.- 

If silence on my part brought only loss of my sisters' confidence 
in me, I would continue to bear it ; but since I fear (by the promin- 
ence which Miss Willard and her supporters have from time to time 
given it) that confusion of thought is wrought among those whom I 
greatly desire to serve, I am constrained to speak. 

Under Miss Willard's gentle persuasion I was ready to aid her to 
take representative action which embodied her idea of the positions 
our work should take, rather than the positions really held by the 
women who trusted us. 

Fictitious positions thus taken were made the basis of continued 
assumptions until the super-structure thus built has been the castle of 
her beliefs, her fancies, her ambitions, rather than the abode of the 
great army of quiet, toiling women who have done their blessed work 
and achieved their glorious victories in other fields of action and by 
the use of other agencies. 

I believe the hearts of many women will witness to experiences 
in whole or in part similar to those which now accuse me. 

Four years ago a gentleman of wide experience and unquestioned 
probity, said to me, ' 'History will record the alliance of the W. C. T. 
U. with a political party to be the crime of this century." I was 
shocked at what seemed a severe censure. I now believe it was not 
put too strongly, except that, critically speaking, crime involves 
intent. I do not charge — on the contrary I repudiate as unworthy 
the dignity of Christian controversy, the implication that Miss Wil- 
lard, who is mainly responsible for this alliance, intended to do 
wrong. Her personality is her own and has been and shall ever be 
sacredly guarded by me. 

Her career in public service is proper subject of review ; she has 
recently opened it to public gaze in an extensive auto biography t 
therefore with all due deference to her many achievements, we say, 
she acted in this as is her custom in relation to organization work 
with which she is connected ; — she seems not so much to desire to re- 
present those who put her in a commanding position of leadership, as 
to make them a background for her personal exploits, a theatre for 
the exercise of her wonderful powers and accomplishments. 

God had so honored woman's temperance work that I believe she 
was confused with expectation of a popular uprising under the leader- 
ship of the W. C. T. U. with her at its head. 



152 

A great party hurled from power in '84, the speedy dominance of 
the Third Party, the enfranchisement of women and the overthrow of 
the liquor traffic, all soon following, were they to be successive stages 
in the victorious march which should usher her in as the nation's 
deliverer ? 

To be a Joan of Arc in America in the 19th century is not an 
ignoble ambition — a small nature could not be dominated by it — but 
American women as well as American men, while they possess the 
touch of chivalry which enshrines beauty and canonizes heroism, do 
not forget that they long ago repudiated the political system built on 
the divine right of kings and queens. 

In the long run the sober judgment of the average citizen domi- 
nates the politics of this country ; and in reform this same average 
judgment will in time assert itself,- it will resist the fascinations of 
the most brilliant leadership, it will prove that the seductions of per- 
sonal gentleness and the witchery of soft words are powerless to hold 
those whose judgment is not enlisted and whose sense of justice has 
been outraged. 

Therefore, when Miss Willard offers her theories of reform as 
substitutes for the methods sustained by philosophy and history, when 
she uses the personal devotion of temperance women to support her 
political opinions and to further her political ends ; when she tests 
their devotion to temperance and their fitness for service in the W. C. 
T. U., by their acceptance of, or their silent acquiescence in her theo- 
ries of temperance work ; then in self-respect I refuse to follow, and 
in humble fealty to the truth I have espoused I will endeavor to lead 
others to the higher, nobler grounds of intelligent, independent 
acceptance of principles and methods. 

I have little hope that the leaders in the so-called Prohibition 
party movement will ever change their views, though some of them 
have of late been forced by the exigencies of local political contests, 
and their honest desire for substantial results in temperance legisla- 
tion, to accept non-partisan methods. 

But the leaders are few ; the men and women in the ranks are 
many. There are multitudes of '-partisan " alliance women in the W. 
C. T. V. who are actuated by the noblest motives ; whose service in the 
cause amounts to entire self abnegation ; they are not under the thraldom 
of a great ambition, they have made no record which it would be 
humiliating to reconsider and rewrite ; they are not — as I was — under 
the bondage of an almost idolatrous affection ; with these women I 
will argue and expostulate and plead, if perchance I may help to more 
effective Christian service, and save our much-loved organization from 
schism and decreased usefulness. 



153 

It is not pleasant to be called a "disturber of the peace,'' a 
4 -Judas "—a tl sender of spurious reports," a receiver of bribes, doing 
"hellish work " — all these appellations have been passed upon me bi- 
partisan W. C. T. TJ, women, and Miss Willard utters no word ol 
protest . She herself uses her official capacity to aid in this tirade of 
.abuse. 

How are we brought low by this party alliance : How is the fine 
gold of cur Christian love dimmed by party strife and party spirit ? 

Amid these distressing conditions and under these disheartening 
influences, the true soldier in this holy war remembers that his solemn 
oath of allegiance was born of religious conviction and patriotic 
devotion. To him present disaster permits no cessation of hostilities 
or even temporary truce with the enemy, but becomes incentive and 
inspiration to more unflinching defense of already taken positions and 
more determined assaults upon the enemy's remaining defenses. 

That man or woman who has all the charms of fine manners and 
-elegant culture, who seems the embodiment of goodness, but whose 
works are evil, is a most dangerous foe of purity and truth ; so a 
movement using the shibboleths of a righteous cause, and assuming to 
personify moral heroism, but whose works are evil, such a movement 
is an agency well calculated to serve the purposes of error. If the 
cause of the Home against the Saloon were not so sacred, I would 
gladly take off my armor and retire from the field of controversy : If 
the Woman's Christian Temperance Union, were less influential in the 
controversy, and therefore less potent for good or for harm, and if I 
had not already put fifteen years of hard labor into its establishment 
and extention, it would be less agonizing to see its usefulness impaired, 
its teachings corrupted, and the confidence of the christian public 
betrayed. And furthermore the cause of temperance — by which I 
mean — the overthrow of the drinking usuages of society which of course 
includes the utter annihilation of the liquor traffic — is dearer to me 
than the Woman's Christian Temperance Union ; dearer than even the 
cause of temperance is the character of Christian womanhood, which 
is the mightiest human instrumentality for the overthrow of all sin and 
the setting up of the Kingdom of Christ in this dear Land of ours. 



I 



to 



I 



b'STn^h.S^congressi 



°027 272 784 3 



THE TRUTH 



o<INIx> 



THE GASE 



J. ELLEN FOSTER, 



IOWA. 



